Children & vulnerable groups

I am 76 years old and I have seen the general health and wellbeing of the people around me deteriorate at an alarming rate. I have always avoided exposure to high frequency electronics and radio frequencies and I am relatively healthy for 76 and take no prescription medications on a daily basis. Please take the serious concern of our fellow Americans for these issues seriously. Once the damage is done- it cannot be undone. As a professional Architect, if I was proposing a new building etc. for an environmentally sensitive area, many studies would have to be done before approval. Nothing is more environmentally sensitive than our children and grandchildren. Care MUST be taken now to protect them. Thank you for your consideration.

There were studies done decades ago in Denver that showed a high correlation between housing with strong electromagnetic fields and childhood leucimmia. For some reason, probably due to corporate financial interests, these studies have largely been ignored, but the evidence appears to be irrefutable. Nothing good can come from such exposure, whether for adults or children. EMFs, RF Radiation, and wireless radiation exposure should be regulated. Thanks.

This comment is in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am good friends with a family of four who cannot live in the home they own because of the high level of various frequencies in and around their home. They experience a variety of physical symptoms including headaches, loss of energy, foggy minds and more. They are forced to look for areas with lower radiation levels. This includes homeschooling their children as the radiation levels near schools are often too much. I have known other individuals who have had to put up shielding in their bedrooms and go to extraordianry measures to lower the radiation in their homes to alleviate physical symptoms. These people are the canaries in the coal mines. If it can affect some so dramatically as to cause debilitating physical symptoms, it is probably affecting all of us to some degree or other. Therefore, 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.

Subject: A Daughter’s Letter of Concern for the HHS Hearing on EMF Dangers and Electromagnetic Sensitivity Dear Members of Congress and Department of Health and Human Services Officials, I am writing as a daughter who has witnessed the devastating impact that my mother’s health struggles have had on her life and our family. I urge you to take seriously the experiences of people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity and investigate the potential health effects of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and electromagnetic fields (EMFs). My mother is an RN, BSN, with 19 years of experience in ICU, case management, and integrative wellness. Her issues began after Wi-Fi was introduced in her ICU workplace and nurses were required to wear wireless communication devices on their bodies (i.e., Vocera) throughout their shifts. At the same time, wireless exposures increased in our neighborhood and home. 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 later developed mast cell activation syndrome. A day 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. These experiences led her to realize that her symptoms and heart rhythm disturbances were associated with her exposure environments. Ultimately, she had to leave her in-hospital nursing career to protect her health. Watching my mother endure these challenges and give up work she was trained and dedicated to doing has been deeply concerning. Our family had to make enormous financial sacrifices to find a place where she felt better. We purchased land and downsized to a small, older home near the state park, where we could reduce exposures and obtain an electric utility arrangement permitting smart-meter opt-out. Even with these sacrifices, our experience has shown how difficult it can be to find alternatives. Many families simply cannot afford to leave their homes, change jobs, or relocate. No family should have to make these choices to protect a loved one’s health. No one should have to choose between earning a living, attending school, receiving medical care, and seeking an environment in which they feel safe. 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. Where feasible, provide lower-exposure spaces and practical alternatives for people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity. Protect informed choice. Support reasonable smart-meter opt-out provisions and alternatives to unnecessary wireless technologies, without imposing undue financial penalties or denying essential services. Listen to scientists and affected families. Invite independent researchers, 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. As a daughter, I worry not only about my mother's health but also about what these questions could mean 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 that existing standards address every possible risk. I recognize that my mother's experience alone cannot establish scientific causation. However, her experience deserves serious consideration alongside the broader scientific literature. People experiencing these symptoms deserve compassion, appropriate medical evaluation, and research that neither dismisses their concerns nor presumes conclusions before the evidence is assessed. Please use your authority to ensure HHS investigates these concerns thoroughly, supports independent research, and develops policies that protect public health without placing the burden of exposure avoidance on individuals and families who are already struggling. Thank you for your attention to this important public health concern.

Eileen O’Connor Director and Co-Founder EM Radiation Research Trust 16 October 2026 To: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Re: RF/EMF Exposure and Human Health: Response to Request for Information Docket No.: HHS-OASH-2026-0397 Dear Sir or Madam, Please find attached my submission, RF/EMF Exposure and Human Health: Response to the Request for Information, submitted on behalf of the EM Radiation Research Trust. The submission draws on my personal experience, concerns raised by affected communities, scientific literature, and many years of research, public engagement and campaigning on radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF/EMF) and human health. It highlights concerns regarding the assessment of health risks associated with RF/EMF exposure, the need for independent research and transparent evaluation of the evidence, and the importance of meaningful public engagement in decisions affecting public health. I am also providing the ECOLOG report (2000) concerning mobile telecommunications and health effects as a supplementary PDF for HHS to consider alongside my submission. Both documents contain references to scientific studies and relevant literature concerning RF/EMF exposure and human health. I respectfully urge HHS to examine these references and consider the research and evidence presented in both documents as part of its review. In light of the serious public health concerns raised and the continuing scientific debate surrounding RF/EMF exposure, I urge HHS to give urgent consideration to the precautionary principle and implement appropriate measures to protect public health. Action to reduce avoidable exposure should not be unnecessarily delayed while further independent research and transparent scientific assessment continue. Protecting the public must remain a priority, with particular attention to potentially vulnerable groups, including children. I respectfully request that both documents, together with the scientific references they contain, be considered as part of the HHS review and included in the relevant public record, in accordance with the applicable submission procedures. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this important public health matter. I hope these materials will assist HHS in its consideration of the scientific evidence, the concerns of affected communities, and the urgent need for effective, transparent and precautionary measures to safeguard public health. Yours faithfully, Eileen O’Connor Director and Co-Founder EM Radiation Research Trust www.radiationresearch.org UK registered charity established in 2003 Charity No. 1106304

In 2012 I developed Electromagnetic Radiation Syndrome (EMRS)* after being exposed to high levels of pulsed microwave radiation from two smart meters. To this day when I am exposed to a certain level of microwave radiation (for example, riding in a modern car where the wireless tech cannot be turned off or at an event with a lots of people, hence a lot of phones) I experience debilitating symptoms, such as brain fog, fatigue/exhaustion, pressure in my head, and whole body irritability. Not only has this technology posed very real challenges for me, I am also very concerned for my children and children in general. Kids are now exposed to this technology from the start, 24/7; and who is considering or measuring the amount of radiation children are exposed to in schools. We are in need of robust regulations and updated exposure limits that truly reflect the scientific studies that are available. I have included a number of studies that demonstrate the urgent need to update exposure limits. *https://www.emrsyndrome.org/

I am submitting this comment with my perspectives in response to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from several perspectives: as a software engineer with extensive experience working with technology and electronic systems; as a person who has experienced significant symptoms that I associate with exposure to electromagnetic fields and wireless radiation; and as a professional who has spent the past several years measuring and documenting electromagnetic field exposures in my home and other environments. In January of 2022 I eliminated wireless technologies completely from my personal environment and whenever feasible reduced or distanced myself from electric and magnetic emissions. These changes improved my health and allowed me to reengage with the world. Unfortunately, avoidance of wireless technologies required changes that permanently affected my career, family, and personal life. It is impossible to avoid being exposed to all wireless and electromagnetic emissions. Radio frequency exposures from sources which are not my own continue to aggravate my symptoms and limit my life. I don’t want to feel these symptoms anymore when doing normal things like working in an office, walking into a store with an overpowered mesh / wifi system, going to a concert, restaurant, bar, or visiting family or friends. Over the last few years, I learned more about detection, identification, measurement, and mitigation to electromagnetic emissions. My sister became a Building Biology Institute-certified Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist (EMRS). Together we develop practical methods for detecting, measuring, documenting, and reducing electromagnetic exposures. Using these strategies we have significantly improved my functionality and not only am I back at the computer, but I have developed a web application that shows electromagnetic emissions and measurement statistics spatially. I have become particularly concerned that consumers are uninformed about the specifications of a product’s wireless features and have limited or no control over those features. Technology will continue to develop faster than long-term health research and regulatory processes can reasonably keep pace with it. Additionally, the way RF exposure is evaluated does not always reflect the conditions people experience in their daily lives. I therefore encourage HHS to consider these particularly practical areas for regulatory and technology standards: Wireless devices should provide a genuine, user-accessible means of turning off wireless emissions, rather than merely hiding wireless functionality or placing a device into a mode in which emissions continue. Cellular phones should support calls and text messaging when the phone is connected through a wired Ethernet connection to a router, so that consumers who choose a wired network connection can use their phones for these functions without requiring an active wireless connection. Products should be required to display prominently on the packaging standardized consumer-facing RF exposure information, similar in concept to other standardized product information that allows consumers to compare products and make informed choices. the type, number, frequencies and transmission characteristics of a device; how to reduce unnecessary close-proximity exposure; how to use wired alternatives where available; how to disable wireless functions completely; whether a device continues transmitting while in standby or charging; whether simultaneous transmitters were evaluated; whether children or other populations were specifically evaluated; and what exposure conditions were and were not included in testing. I am particularly concerned about exposure involving children, infants, pregnancy, and other populations that may differ from those of a typical adult. Children may spend many hours in schools and childcare facilities surrounded by multiple wireless transmitters, sometimes at very close distances. Wireless devices are also increasingly incorporated into products used by infants and children. Federal research and exposure assessment should therefore specifically address age-specific and developmental exposure scenarios rather than assuming that adult testing adequately represents all populations. I also believe that federal research priorities should include long-term, independent investigation of cumulative and chronic exposure, children and pregnancy, reproductive and developmental outcomes, neurological and sleep-related effects, cardiovascular and other biological effects, environmental and ecological effects, and exposure associated with evolving technologies such as 5G, future wireless systems, IoT devices, wearables, smart homes, wireless medical devices, and increasingly dense wireless infrastructure. See attached file.

Question 2: Individual consumer, parent, and health advocate focused on children’s cumulative exposure and the adequacy of current standards. Current U.S. RF/EMF limits address only short-term thermal effects. They do not account for non-thermal mechanisms (voltage-gated calcium channel activation, oxidative stress, glutathione depletion, mitochondrial strain) documented in the majority of experimental studies at intensities below those limits (Pall 2013; Yakymenko et al. 2016). IARC’s Group 2B classification remains in effect. Children face higher relative absorption and lifetime cumulative exposure. Question 5 / Standards: Federal agencies should evaluate ICNIRP/FCC thermal-only guidelines against biologically based approaches and the existing non-thermal evidence base. Thermal-only standards are not adequate for chronic, multi-source, real-world exposure. Question 16 — Highest-priority research gaps (ranked): 1. Oxidative stress and glutathione status (GSH/GSSG, MDA, 8-OHdG) in humans under measured real-world exposure, especially children. 2. Prospective cohort of school-age children with personal RF dosimetry linked to sleep, neurodevelopmental, and oxidative markers. 3. Independent replication of VGCC and mitochondrial effects at non-thermal intensities with full exposure characterization and sham controls. 4. Standardized observation of self-reported intolerance presentations correlated with objective oxidative biomarkers. 5. Intervention studies of exposure reduction (wired classrooms, nighttime shutdown, distance) plus glutathione-support protocols. Questions 7–9: Current SAR testing does not capture multi-source, body-contact, or cumulative exposure. Require real-world dosimetry, plain-language disclosure for schools and residences, and public reporting of infrastructure density near sensitive sites. Immediate actions possible with existing authority: • Redirect a portion of existing research funds to the gaps above with mandatory conflict-of-interest disclosure. • Issue interim guidance: distance from devices, no body-contact use, routers/phones out of bedrooms, prefer wired for fixed high-use applications. • Update federal procurement and school facility guidance to prefer Ethernet/fiber for fixed connections while retaining wireless for true mobility. • Systematically collect clinical observations rather than dismiss them. Preferring wired/fiber for fixed applications does not reduce technological capacity; fiber routinely outperforms wireless on bandwidth, latency, and security for schools and offices. Hybrid designs preserve mobility. Full mechanistic detail, references, and expanded recommendations are in Attachment 1.

Cellphones, kitchen appliances, LED and florescent bulbs, electric car amenities, air conditioning, and too many other things to mention!! I've been dealing with this for 7 yrs now! It's affected every aspect of my body, mind, social life, health, mental health, ability to walk, EVERYTHING! I'm 76yrs old trying my best to take care of my 91yr old husband! Im so glad your checking on this stuff. Im afraid for my kids and grandkids and what this is doing to our country!

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 someone struggling with her own health issues, while seeing others struggle, as well. Also, as someone who is familiar with research suggesting radiation causes harm far in excess of anything paid shills for the industry are willing to admit. On a strictly experiential level: Radiation exposure is a lot like boiling a frog. The frog doesn't know what's happening, but it feels unwell, it has lost and continues to lose function and a baseline sense of well-being, and eventually, unless it's removed from the cooking pot, it will die. When I moved out of an apartment building blighted with a high density of WiFi signals... to a location with fewer WiFi routers per square mile, I started to sleep better, and other issues eased, as well. I'm still being boiled in all the other sources of radiation (cell phones and cell phone masts, smart meters, etc), but even this minor change has made an appreciable difference in my sleep. How much more lost function and productivity (over the past years) might I regain in an environment without all this toxic, weapons-grade radiation… that our own military used to admit was a threat to the health and preparedness of its troops! How many more of my health issues might reverse, if I didn't have to endure radiation levels up to a million times normal background radiation which our bodies and brains have historically been exposed to! How much more functional and healthy and happy might our children be, and all of our society be, without this pervasive and unprecedented toxic exposure! The failure to properly investigate and regulate radiation is nothing short of a crime against humanity. Ecocide, too. One way or another, the truth will come out. Better it come out sooner, to spare us needless suffering, and spare our planet the needless loss and extinction of its most vulnerable species, starting with insects and birds, but including our precious children. The link between radiation and biological harm is established for any who are courageous enough to acknowledge it. I urge HHS to take 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 ALL these experiences AND the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give espeical attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing me this opportunity to be heard.