Children & vulnerable groups

As a Doctor who has been injured from radiofrequency radiation, I have a sincere interest in new, updated regulations of HHS and the FCC to protect all living things from the known biological harm of RFR. Since 2018, living near a cell tower, sleeping close to a smart meter and having a wifi router from a neighbor within 10 feet of my sleeping space, I have had neurological harm. Since then, when I'm near a wifi router or another person's phone or smart watch, I get burning pain on my skin in the area closest to the pulse-modulated RF radiation. I also get severe fatigue, brain fog, a pressure headache, and the next days to weeks I feel "hungover" from the exposure. It makes normal functioning very difficult. When I sleep next to someone with a smart watch on or sleep in a house/hotel with wifi on, my sleep is very poor- I wake up many times and have trouble falling asleep. When I sleep at home with our wifi router turned off and phones off, I wake up much more rested and do not wake up in the middle of the night. I fear for my young daughter and unborn baby, since research shows their brains absorb much more radiofrequency radiation, and it is pervasive in classrooms, places of worship, as well as playgrounds. I am calling for more research on the biological harms from radiofrequency radiation, particularly pulse-modulated RF radiation. As more cell towers proliferate and new bands of frequency are being used, there needs to be a halt to all new infrastructure until solid research has been done to investigate the impacts on living beings- humans, flora and fauna. The current FCC guideline is based on an antiquated study from 30 years ago. Telecommunications have changed drastically over that time period, so that is now irrelevant. What studies have the FCC or HHS done to evaluate the RFR's effects on cellular health and oxidative stress, which manifest into countless disease states? What about neurobehavioral outcomes, like children learning in school near a wifi router, or productivity and concentration in the workplace? How are migrating animals and insects affected by the never-ending bombardment of frequencies running through their bodies? How does that impact ecosystems and ultimately human health? Europe has more stringent standards on pulse-modulated RF radiation to protect the health of its citizens and wildlife- why don't we mirror their regulations as a starting point and add on as more research has accumulated? The cost of inaction is far too high- if HHS fails to produce relevant research to protect the health of all living beings, what is the cost to all of humanity? The cost of healthcare is already astronomical in the US. Could limiting the number of towers, satellites, smart devices, band frequencies and the power produced by these structures decrease the amount of human suffering and cost of "mystery" chronic disease states? Before any new technology is developed, I urge HHS to study chronic radiofrequency radiation exposure at ambient levels in a cohort study as well as RCT studies to assess the cellular and physiological changes with acute exposure to pulse-modulated RF radiation. Please see the references attached as evidence to support my claims. The inaction of federal health agencies, including the HHS, in studying the biological and environmental effects of RFR and pulse-modulated RF radiation is extremely disappointing. As a Doctor and one who has been injured by RFR, I see the damage this has on my patients as well. I did not consent, nor do I consent today, to the continuous, involuntary exposure to biologically active RF radiation. Please allocate necessary funding to study RF radiation's effects on living beings. It is the ethical, responsible and humanitarian action to do that. Sincerely, Dr. Colton References: Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P, Müller K, Oberfeld G, Ohnsorge P, Pelzmann P, Scheingraber C, Thill R. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 2016 Sep 1;31(3):363-97. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011. PMID: 27454111. Kaszuba-Zwoińska J, Gremba J, Gałdzińska-Calik B, Wójcik-Piotrowicz K, Thor PJ. Electromagnetic field induced biological effects in humans. Przegl Lek. 2015;72(11):636-41. PMID: 27012122. International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G. Environ Health. 2022 Oct 18;21(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9. PMID: 36253855; PMCID: PMC9576312.

I have serious headaches around cell towers since my son went to kindergarten, where by their classroom, there are not one, but two, cell towers sitting right next to the kindergarten classroom, close to the children's playground. After dropping off my son there for a period of time, I started having headaches whenever I was at the playground waiting for him to go into the classroom. The headache would stay with me while I drove back home, and when I was home, the headache would almost be gone. When I tried to get to the cell towers to get some readings from an RF meter, my head hurt severely and I couldn't get any closer to the cell towers anymore. I got sensitivity to EMF whenever I'm close to some kind of radiation since then. Like when I went to a restaurant and I noticed my head hurts, I would turn around and found a smart TV right behind me. Or when I went to a friend's house/ clinic/ fast food chain/ wherever I go, and I noticed that my head hurt, I would find the Wifi router right above me/ very close to me, and sometimes even behind a wall. Since Wifi and cellphone technologies are getting more advanced, my head hurts a lot more frequently, even at home. I had to switch Internet Service Provider because my head hurts so much with the High-Speed 5G Internet, and opt for a slower one. I also have to set the Wifi band to 2.4 Ghz instead of 5 Ghz, and put it inside a metal box in order to reduce the Wifi radiation as much as possible. I have to turn off Wifi at night before I sleep, or else I'll have headaches all night. I can't control my neighbors' Wifi, but I can feel which part of the house has stronger signals with my headaches (and confirmed with a RF meter), and try to stay away from those areas if I could. Last but not least, I have a meningioma in my head, although it's calcified, it's continually growing, and the growth of the meningioma could be related to those increasingly strong exposures. Many scientific research studies had shown links to EMF/ RF exposure to brain tumors, which would be especially harmful to children. Attached with this comment are pictures of the cell towers in the elementary school (Knox Gifted Academy in Chandler, AZ), and pictures of my brain meningioma scans. The elementary school mentioned is part of Chandler Unified School District, and although quite a number of parents contacted the superintendent back then about the risks and harmful concerns on our children, they argued that there is no proof for these concerns, and they’re completely safe. I saw cell towers all over the district schools, and so are the other school districts in the valley. This is simply not the right thing to do for any school districts to put cell towers in their school grounds just for more funding. Even if there’s the slightest chance that these EMF infrastructures could harm the children, teachers and people around, this shouldn’t be done in the first place, let alone planting them all over school districts. I truly hope that with this nationwide request for collecting experiences and expertise from regular citizens and experts could help our country, the greatest in the world, to lead the world to do the right thing. The next step for the technology will be 6G, and it will only be more powerful and destructive to the human race at the same time. Please don’t repeat the mistake and harm done as 5G was enrolled, to race and chase after the fame of the world’s fastest to get to the technology, at the expense of the whole country’s health. We’re digging graves for ourselves and this would be irreversible. Thank you very much for “Making American Healthy Again”!!!

Hello, it's refreshing after more than 20 years that I suffer of hypersensitivity to EMF to have this opportunity to give my personal coment on a condition that has limited in many ways my life and consequently had an impact also to the life of my family. The hardest thing of my condition has been and still is the lack of recognition from my country (Italy) and internationally in general. In spite of A Scientific Consensus International Report, "The critical Importance of Molecular Biomarkers and Imaging in the Sudy of Electromagnetichypersensitivity" International Journal ofMolecularScience2021;22(14):7321.doi:10.3390/ijms22147321. and thausands of different studies, generally no doctor knows enough to be able to help as the research is brought forward only by private indipendent scientists and no government body invests on indipendent research. About me: In the presence of a mobilephone switched on in an eclosed space, I start feeling hot, dizy and generally unwell, strengthless. After about 10 minutes I might become all red in my face, start to see out of focus or feeling sensitive in my ears, that also become red and hot and oversensitive to sound. Even now, that I spend this time in front of my cabled computer, set on airplane mode, I start getting red in my face because the small radiations from the screen. I say might because different symptoms appear according to different frequencies, time of exposure, local environment..etc. The last train jurney I've undertaken many years ago caused me a very strong headache with nausea and fever for three days. I live in fear to find myself in the situation to have to stay in hospital for some reason as I know that I wouldn't find an adeguate environment (a room without emf) but instead I would have to be exposed to elettromagnetic fields that I know would contribute very negatively to my recovery. In fact all patients are allowed to use their mobile phones in the shared wards to keep in touch with friends and relatives. My condition is socially alienating, as friends and family cant't find adeguate information about the condition, on the contrary they find istitutional sites that openly deny its axistance or explain it as idiomatic condition caused mainly by psycological state of mind. Luckily, I still find some understanding from the people that are very close to me. Since my first symptoms appeared doctors have given different explanations for each individual symptoms never been able to answer about the main cause of my general state of health. Only by experiencing the same symptoms when I was exposed to EFM and noticing the disappearance of these symptoms in protected o EMF free environments, brought me to realise my hypersensitivity to EMF. Realising and understanding the condition can help to evoid to be overexposed (with a consequent deterioration of the condition), unfortunately it remains impossible evoiding EMF all together or thinking that one day you'll be able to enjoy a "normal "life because the technology continues to ignore the biological effects proven by thousands of studies from indipendent scientis and the direction is towards incrementing population exposure, not decreasing it. In fact the subject of biological effects of electromagnetic field on people has become "tabu subject", and that's why it's refreshing to have this opportunity to coment. So at the moment and for the last 20 years, I had to accept not to be able to use public transport or fly abroad to see my grandchildren, not to go to cinemas, restaurants, museums..or other enclosed areas where there might be a lot of people with their mobile phones on, or a strong wi fi signal. Long jurney by car are problematic also as motorways are becoming smart roads. If I want to mantain a social life I have to ask friends and family to swich their mobile phones when they come and visit, or ask them to meet outdoors with their mobile phones switched off. As the condition is not ufficially recognised not everybody is understanding enough to comply. It definately would be easier to be allergic to peanuts! I try to convince myself that if I don't give my condition too much importance it won't limit me so much, unfortunately the syntoms remind me promptly make me feel ill there and after. The depressing thing is that I know that my condition in this "new tecnological" environment cannot improve, but is destined to deteriorate untill my life as the life of many other people with my same condition becomes impossible or very debilitated as the body, living in a constant state of allert, starts developing functional deterioration. It would be nice if the research for safer means of comunication, backed by truly indipendent scientist could go towards options able to offer services that are truly safe for people, especially with hypersensitivity, children and the old. I hope to have beeing able to contribute in someways with this coment and I thank for the opportunity. Anna

I submit my attached public comment and personal declaration in response to HHS Request for Information, Docket No. HHS-OASH-2026-0397. My submission describes my family's experiences involving radiofrequency electromagnetic exposure, serious neurological medical crises affecting our disabled adult son, and our efforts to obtain appropriate accommodations. I urge HHS to investigate reported biological and health effects, particularly among individuals with epilepsy and other neurological disabilities, and to support independent scientific research. Please accept and consider my attached PDF in its entirety as part of the public record. Respectfully, Michael T. Jennings

On behalf of Southwest Pennsylvania for Safe Technology, I submit our organization's attached public comment and supporting scientific research in response to HHS Request for Information, Docket No. HHS-OASH-2026-0397. Our submission presents reports received from Pennsylvania individuals and families concerning biological and health effects associated with radiofrequency electromagnetic exposure, including serious neurological medical crises involving medically vulnerable individuals. We urge HHS to investigate these reports, prioritize independent scientific research concerning individuals with epilepsy and other neurological disabilities, evaluate cumulative and involuntary exposures, and consider practical exposure reduction accommodations, including non-transmitting utility metering alternatives. Our submission includes two scientific attachments identifying relevant peer-reviewed research and examining the methodology and conclusions of WHO-commissioned systematic reviews. Please accept and consider our complete attached PDF, including both attachments, as part of the public record. Respectfully, Susan M. Jennings, MPA Founder, Southwest Pennsylvania for Safe Technology

Docket ID: HHS-OASH-2026-0397 Regarding: Request for Information (RFI) on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure As a seasoned Care Manager & Multispecialty Office manager as well n individual caregiver with over ten years of lived environmental illness experience, alongside my husband a Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine, I am submitting my formal testimony to Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397. Because our response contains comprehensive historical tracking data, detailed case overviews, and active scientific hyperlinks that exceed the character limitations of this text field, we have attached our complete, unedited narrative and scientific review as a PDF titled: Attachment1_Master_Packet_Docket_HHS_OASH_2026_0397.pdf. Our submission provides specific, evidence-backed justifications addressing several core tracks of this RFI: 1. Public Experiences (Questions 2 & 3): We provide a complete longitudinal case history documenting how a high-density neighborhood 5G rollout and household wireless exposure directly aligned with an acute pediatric neuropsychiatric break, profound dissociation, encephalopathy, and severe autonomic degradation in our children. It outlines our eventual health stabilization achieved only by removing all wireless vectors and establishing an analog, hardwired sanctuary. Both impacted children have since grown into adulthood, providing the agency with a rare multi-year perspective on long-term environmental tracking. 2. Clinical Observations & Evidence Below Limits (Questions 4, 5, & 12): We present peer-reviewed biomedical evidence proving sub-thermal biological damage vastly below current federal thermal baselines. This includes Dr. Martin Pall’s research on Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel (VGCC) activation leading to blood-brain barrier permeability, which allows circulating mycotoxins and vector-borne neurotoxins (Lyme/Mold) to cross into the central nervous system. We also cite data demonstrating that ambient wireless radiation accelerates fungal pathogen defenses, directly increasing indoor mycotoxin production up to threefold. 3. Vulnerable Populations & K-12 Infrastructure Policy (Question 11): We formally demand federal recognition of biotoxin-sensitized and genetically vulnerable populations as a protected class. Furthermore, we call for an absolute mandate replacing wireless router networks with safe, hardwired fiber-optic infrastructure in K-12 school systems. Analysis of Policy Trade-offs: We acknowledge that a hardwired transition requires school districts to absorb upfront infrastructure retrofitting costs and adapt device-dependent lesson plans. However, these immediate costs are heavily outweighed by the massive, long-term public health savings, reduced student absenteeism, minimized chronic healthcare utilization, and superior local cybersecurity. This matches robust international precautionary health precedents already established in countries like France, Israel, and Cyprus. We urge the Department of Health and Human Services to evaluate this cumulative environmental synergy, move past outdated thermal metrics, and call an emergency congressional and medical panel hearing to rebuild national safety parameters from scratch. Please see our attached PDF for our full, unedited narrative testimony and primary peer-reviewed journal citations. Respectfully Submitted, Elizabeth Wright

I have experienced negative effects from both major kinds of EMFs: RF and what is commonly called dirty electricity from power cords and appliances. At one point, I could not even use a computer mouse for extended periods of time because it would cause pain in that hand that would immediately cease once lifting my hand. With RF, similarly, after 10-15 mins of exposure, I experience symptoms of headaches or a general fuzziness that is hard to describe. Avoiding these sources allows recovery and reduced sensitivity, and ability to withstand longer periods of exposure. My biggest concern is the lack of safety guidelines for things like localized 5g towers, and a general ignoring of expert calls for reevaluation, such as the bio initiative report. Recently, using an EMF meter, I have detected highly unsafe levels of electric radiation from underground powerlines running parallel to sidewalks, presenting an eminent danger to pedestrians, especially those who have to walk repeatedly along the same routes every day. I have also detected huge spikes in RF radiation near small cell towers and have seen them placed on schools and extremely close to residential apartments and houses.

Comment on Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397: Request for Information on EMFs, RF Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure Question 2: Perspective I am submitting this comment as an individual who experiences adverse symptoms from exposure to wireless radiation and other electromagnetic fields. Question 3: Personal Experience a. Sources: I react to cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, 5G, smart meters, wireless printers, and other smart or wireless devices. c. Symptoms: When exposed, I experience heart palpitations, elevated blood pressure, headaches, dizziness, nausea, disorientation, and elevated and erratic blood sugar. f. Steps taken to reduce exposure: I have no wireless internet or any kind of wireless device in my home other than a 4G cell phone for emergencies, which is kept off all of the time unless needed. Avoiding exposure has reshaped nearly every part of my life: Work: I cannot work anywhere other than at home. Housing: I cannot live in apartments or near other houses, buildings, or cell towers. Finding a safe home is becoming harder every year as wireless infrastructure expands. Transportation: I drive a 2003 vehicle because I cannot ride in most modern cars, which are full of wireless systems. Public life: I cannot stay in public places for long, and I cannot spend much time in the homes of friends and family. Healthcare and government services: I have had to walk out of medical appointments and appointments in government buildings because I became too sick to stay. Hospitals are among the hardest places for me to be. During one hospital stay, doctors did not understand why I became sicker and sicker until they realized that a wireless heart monitor was the cause and I improved once it was removed. However, the exposure usually comes from so many different sources in the building and the other equipment that the exposure cannot be removed or lowered enough. Because of this, I have had to avoid hospital stays or leave earlier than my doctors recommended. This is a serious problem when I need medical care. This is not a minor inconvenience. It limits my ability to earn a living, find housing, use transportation, receive medical care, access government services, and maintain relationships. Question 13(j) and Question 11(d) and (f): Wireless Medical Devices My doctor prescribed medical equipment that I cannot use because it relies on Bluetooth. As medical devices increasingly become wireless by default, people who react to RF exposure are being shut out of care they need. Wired or non-wireless alternatives should remain available for medical devices, and patients should be told whether a device emits RF and whether its wireless functions can be turned off. Question 11: Sensitive Populations Yes, exposure assessment should differ for sensitive populations. In addition to children and pregnant women, HHS should recognize people who experience symptoms from RF/EMF exposure as a population that needs specific study and protection (11g). Case reports have documented people developing symptoms after nearby 5G installations [18], and studies of people living near cell towers have reported symptoms such as headache, dizziness, and sleep problems [19, 20], as well as changes in blood sugar [25]. Children absorb more RF radiation into their brains and bodies than adults do [1, 2, 21]. Prenatal exposure has been linked to neurodevelopmental and behavioral changes in animals [3], and RF exposure has been associated with effects on memory performance in adolescents [4]. Question 12: Evidence of Effects Below Current Limits Current federal limits were set in 1996 and are based mainly on heating. Research has reported biological effects at levels below these limits, including oxidative stress [5], DNA damage [6, 7, 8], reproductive harm [9, 10, 11, 12], and tumors in animals exposed over their lifetimes [13]. Reviews conclude that non-thermal effects are not accounted for by current limits [14, 22, 23]. Question 14: Environmental Effects RF radiation may also affect wildlife, including bird and insect orientation and insect exposure at higher frequencies [15, 16, 17]. Recommendations [24] 1. Fund independent research on long-term and cumulative exposure. 2. Develop science-based exposure limits that account for non-thermal effects. 3. Require safety testing of wireless devices before they go on the market, and track health problems after. 4. Improve oversight and enforcement of exposure limits. 5. Reduce exposures for children, vulnerable groups, and wildlife. 6. Require wired or non-wireless options for medical devices. 7. Create low-EMF areas in hospitals, medical offices, and government buildings. 8. Require clear disclosure of RF emissions from devices, vehicles, and infrastructure. References are provided in the attached PDF.

Having to deal with this myself, growing up, and having worked with so many individuals with dementia and children with special needs, I am passionate about neuroplasticity and cognitive development. I have numerous articles that I would love to share with you all if you are willing to do so. At one time, I reached out to Dr. Kennedy, but I do not know whether or not he viewed my research. Thank you all for your research on this subject. I will continue to conduct research, myself, and I look forward to seeing your data, as well. Thanks you!

Dear OASH staffs, I’m the Chair of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection and I just received information about US Health Ministry the Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields from few my US colleagues (Dr’s Moskowitz, Pakhomov, Slesin etc). As is well known, the EMF exposure limits for the general public in Russia is more strong than in the USA (in 100 times). The main reasons for this is differing criteria for assessing harm from EMF biological effects, as well as the specific nature of the state regulatory system for electromagnetic field sources in Russia. Russia has 130 years of scientific school in EMF biomes research, therefore we have collected datas about most of EMF bioeffects, including non-thermal, information and thermal effects. As Russia has strict mandatory EMF limits under states service control, we haven’t issues regarding EMF hypersensitivity or EMF cancer. The question of specific EMF limits for children in digital education environment is discuss now (for example, on national hygiene science and radiobiology conference last week). Hope you and colleagues know, that the international debate over the reasons for and advisability of a strict EMF limit has been ongoing for more than 50 years, include direct discussion between US and Russian scientists since early 1970th. Mandatory EMF limits were established in Russia (USSR) in 1968; some last, EMF limits for general population covering all EMF frequencies since 1971. One of the most edition of EMF radio frequency limit took place in 1984, after finish of the USSR-USA joint EMF health research project under government’s agreement (1975-1985). Our EMF health scientist has joint Russia-USA bioEMF projects in 1997-2006 too. US Scientists from few universities participated in these projects, as EPA staffs and EMF researchers from AFRL (Radio Frequency Radiation Branch, Brooks Air Force Base), who was as IEEE C95 members. Huge collection of EMF biological effects data has been summarized and analyzed; these are likely the best syntheses available, enabling the establishment of «dose-effect» relationships and the prediction of both medical and biological effects for new exposure conditions. Although biological effects can vary, when we talk about medical consequences, it's clear that adults human has a limited number of possible ways to react, adapt, and de-adapt to electromagnetic overexposure. Therefore, it is not the best methodology way to find for distinct effects based on the specific EMF source (such as 5/6G). However, there are specific aspects to the EMF impact on a child's organism, including effects on the formation and development of children’s nervous system, that necessitate a special approach to electromagnetic safety for children. The WHO Electromagnetic Project, launched in 1996, was unsuccessful; it failed to resolve the issue of EMF health standard int harmonization and has some accusations of industry influence. Despite the turbulence, global economic and technologies continue to evolve, therefore need to have a common approach for electromagnetic safety for humans. So, the EMF initiative of the Minister Mr. Kennedy could be international. We know that China’s exposure limits fall somewhere between those of Russia and the USA; however, the country’s system for monitoring electromagnetic safety regarding environmental sources has utilized Russian methods as base for adopting. As a chairperson, I possess all the original materials regarding research into the biological effects of electromagnetism in the USSR and Russia. Of course, the majority of these publications are in Russian, which presents a challenge for analysis in English. I’m attaching our article in English, which summarizes main conclusion of EMF bio-medical research in Russia. We would appreciate your opinion on possible international participation in the electromagnetic safety system. Several years ago, I received a mail from Mr. Kennedy, when he was not yet the USA Secretary for Health. We would be happy to restart scientific cooperation for public health once again in EMF health safety issues. This letter doesn’t represent the position of the government, was not initiated by the government, and is not intended to influence the policies of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Sincerely, Dr. Oleg A. Grigoriev Dr. Sc. (radiobiology), Ph.D.(radiobiology & hygiene of non-ionizing radiation) Chairman, Russian National Committee for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection Member of the Board, Scientific Council for Radiobiology, Russian Academy of Sciences