Children & vulnerable groups

Je soumets ce commentaire en réponse à la demande d'informations du HHS sur les champs électromagnétiques (CEM), les rayonnements radiofréquences (RF) et l'exposition aux rayonnements sans fil. Je réponds du point de vue d’un [patient, parent, membre de la famille, aidant, professionnel de la santé, chercheur, défenseur, membre du public concerné ou autre]. Je suis personnellement électro-hypersensible depuis plus de 10 ans et ma vie est devenue un véritable parcours de combattant. Je ne peux pas travailler, ni avoir une vie sociale car tous ont des cellulaires, le wifi partout etc.. Je souffre énormément dans mon corps chaque jour et je n'ai pas d'endroit où me protéger de ce qui me rend malade... Je dois me réfugier à tout moment sous un baldequin anti-onde, un tissu protecteur d'onde placé comme une tente par dessus mon lit, je m'y réfugie plusieurs fois par jour et c'est ce qui me permet de survivre.. car je ne vis pas, je survies... Je soutiens l'implication active du Département de la Santé et des Services sociaux (HHS) dans l'examen des effets potentiels des rayonnements sans fil sur la santé et l'environnement. Les questions relatives à la santé humaine devraient être traitées par les agences fédérales possédant l'expertise appropriée en médecine, biologie, épidémiologie et santé publique, et les témoignages des personnes et des familles qui se disent affectées devraient être pris en compte au même titre que les données scientifiques. J’exhorte le HHS à évaluer soigneusement ces expériences et les données scientifiques, à identifier les lacunes de la recherche actuelle, à accorder une attention particulière aux enfants et aux autres populations potentiellement vulnérables, et à établir des priorités de recherche fédérales appropriées concernant les rayonnements sans fil et la santé publique. Merci de donner aux individus et aux familles l'occasion de se faire entendre.

I don't like it or want me nor my children exposed to this, only to find of the long term disks years down the road. I do not consent. Teresa Ekdahl-Johnson

I strongly believe communities should not be subjected to unnecessary or escalating levels of RF emissions. In many neighborhoods, companies begin with a single antenna and later add many more, creating dense clusters that increase exposure for families, children, older adults, wildlife, and the environment. This pattern places a growing burden on communities while generating profit for carriers, not benefits for residents. I want to be clear that I am not opposed to technology. I support safe technology that is responsibly sited in locations away from homes, schools, wildlife corridors, and sensitive ecosystems. I am certain there are suitable sites that do not place antennas directly next to residents or wildlife habitat. Older neighborhoods with mature trees, established wildlife pathways, and long‑standing rural character should not be subjected to cumulative exposure simply because they lack HOA protections or dense development. Trees, birds, pollinators, and other wildlife are increasingly exposed to dense antenna installations, and these impacts deserve serious federal attention. Communities need national guidelines that ensure wireless infrastructure is placed where it does not harm people, wildlife, or the environment. For these reasons, I respectfully request a deep federal study of RF exposure impacts, including long‑term effects on human health, wildlife, and ecosystems. I also recommend that Congress consider updating the Telecommunications Act of 1996 so that health, environmental, and wildlife concerns can be openly evaluated in modern wireless policy. The current law prevents communities from raising health concerns when opposing towers, even when those concerns are legitimate. Technology has changed dramatically since 1996, and federal policy should reflect today’s scientific knowledge and today’s environmental realities. Communities deserve transparency, protection, and guidelines that prioritize public health and environmental stewardship over profit.

I have a deep concern about all the towers going up, close to homes and schools. We have no idea the long term affects all the EMFs are causing because they put them up without ever doing long- term studies. However, we do know that children exposed to the high frequencies have gotten sick from headaches to cancers. We know that high exposure to EMFs causes a lifetime of chronic illness, many problems we don’t even know about yet. Cell phones, towers, smart meters…all have so many potential deadly outcomes. I make sure our family is as protected as we can be, with paying attention to WiFi and placement of routers and our ways to mitigate. But it feels like a battle I will never win when we are bombarded 24 hours a day. Please put the brakes on EMFs and do some quality studies, not by companies who benefit.

Please help us, Americans. We are exposed to what would be illegal levels of radiation, in Europe and other countries. Verizon wants to put "cell" (GWEN) towers,in residential places, among children,etc., and now Berizon is suing the city of Grass Valley, California. Corporations have been given priority over our people! Thank you. -Laura McClary

Please Protect us from the 5g and 6g emf exposure. The dangers are extreme and can cause flu like symptoms as well as cancers and harm to cognitive ability and nervous systems. The fact that they are placed on top of schools and churches and apartment buildings without knowing the full risk is insane. None of this makes any sense. Please stop this.

Subject: Public Comment on RF/EMF Exposure and the Need for Stronger Public Health Protections Docket: HHS-OASH-2026-0397 I am submitting this comment as a concerned American citizen who believes our government must protect human health, future generations, and the environment from potentially harmful electromagnetic and radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure. I am deeply concerned about the expansion of cell towers, 5G infrastructure, wireless transmitters, and smart meters that contribute to continuous, involuntary RF exposure. Americans should not be subjected to increasing environmental exposure without rigorous, independent evidence establishing long-term safety. 1. Scientific Evidence of Potential Harm Substantial published research identifies potential biological effects associated with RF radiation. National Toxicology Program (2018): This major U.S. government investigation reported clear evidence of carcinogenic activity involving malignant heart schwannomas in male rats exposed to certain cell phone RF signals. Researchers also identified other tumor findings. https://doi.org/10.22427/NTP-TR-595 Ramazzini Institute (2018): This independent study investigated long-term RF exposure representative of cell tower emissions and reported increased heart schwannomas among male rats at the highest exposure level. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.037 Hardell and Carlberg (2015): Researchers reported associations between prolonged wireless phone use and increased glioma risk, particularly with longer latency periods. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25466607/ These findings warrant further independent investigation rather than dismissal. 2. Outdated Safety Standards Federal RF exposure standards have not adequately kept pace with modern wireless technology or continuous exposure from multiple overlapping sources. Safety assessments must address cumulative exposure, long-term biological effects, and potential nonthermal effects. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals found that the FCC had failed to adequately explain its treatment of evidence concerning non-cancer effects, children, long-term exposure, and environmental impacts. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-1025/20-1025-2021-08-13.html 3. Stronger Restrictions on Wireless Infrastructure I urge federal officials to substantially strengthen restrictions on cell tower placement, density, and emissions, particularly near homes, schools, hospitals, and agricultural land. I specifically request: 1. Independent reassessment of federal RF exposure limits using current research and cumulative exposure measurements. 2. Stricter tower-siting and emission standards near residential communities and sensitive locations. 3. Independent RF monitoring with publicly accessible results. 4. Long-term research concerning children, pregnant women, and vulnerable populations. 5. Investment in wired telecommunications and lower-emission alternatives. 6. Greater community involvement in tower placement decisions. 7. Investigation of potential effects on livestock, wildlife, pollinators, and ecosystems. 4. Industry Accountability and Independent Research Research establishing public safety standards must be transparent, reproducible, and free from undue commercial influence. I request disclosure of industry funding, conflicts of interest, unpublished findings, and underlying research data used in federal safety assessments. Studies identifying potential biological harm deserve serious evaluation regardless of commercial interests. 5. Public Health Must Come First Technological convenience and economic development should not automatically outweigh legitimate public health concerns. I support substantial reductions in unnecessary RF exposure, stricter wireless infrastructure limits, independent testing, and a precautionary approach wherever important safety questions remain unresolved. The American public deserves transparency, meaningful choices concerning involuntary exposure, and safety standards based on comprehensive scientific evidence rather than assumptions. I urge HHS to fully evaluate the research and establish stronger protections for human health, future generations, animals, and the environment. Thank you for considering my comment.

Could these systems (5G towers, flock cameras, etc ) potentially be used as weapons or be hacked into by adversaries? These systems are being placed very close to schools. As well as in neighborhoods. It is highly concerning. More importantly, what is the over time accumulated effect on the nervous systems of humans exposed? Brian fog? Fatigue? Neurological disorder exacerbations? Psychological harm? What are these devices providing to the population of taxpaying, citizens and their offspring ? Is that service worth the potential health effects? We're we not productive enough of a society before 5G? In addition to human health, where does the natural environment that sustains us come into play, how are we making sure that the wildlife -flora and fauna are not being negatively affected?

We are reaching out because our family desperately needs help. My husband and I are raising our five children on a 160-acre horse farm in Amish country that we have spent the last 20 years of our married life building. It’s a third-generation family property, a dream we’ve poured our hearts, finances, and countless hours into, hoping to pass it down for generations to come. We live a very simple life, eat clean healthy food, don’t vaccinate and grow most of our own food. But there’s one heartbreaking problem. We have a heavily equipped 5G cell tower practically in our backyard, with another tower just half a mile away. What originally started as a simple 2G tower has since been upgraded and expanded into a heavily loaded 5G tower. Within about a year of living here, we began experiencing unusual health problems. Over time, those problems have escalated, and now multiple members of our family are battling serious illnesses and difficult-to-diagnose conditions. After years of searching for answers and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars pursuing treatment and healing, we began looking more closely at our environment and the possibility that our health issues could be connected to prolonged exposure to high levels of electromagnetic radiation. We eventually hired a professional to test our home, and according to the exposure guidelines used in their assessment, the readings in our bedrooms were seven times higher than what they considered safe. We contacted the tower company, hoping they might be willing to install shielding, a deflector, or explore some other way to reduce the exposure to our home. Unfortunately, we have gotten nowhere. We have also been working with an attorney to explore whether there is any way out of the existing tower contract, but so far, we have been told there is no way to terminate it. And now we find ourselves facing something we never imagined: the possibility of having to walk away from the home and farm we have spent our entire married life building. This isn’t just a house to us. It’s our family’s history, our livelihood, our children’s memories, and the dream we had of watching future generations grow up here. We cannot say with certainty that the towers are responsible for every health condition our family is experiencing, but the concerns are serious enough that we no longer feel comfortable continuing to live here. After everything we’ve invested in this property, and everything we’ve spent trying to regain our health, the thought of leaving is absolutely heartbreaking. So we are asking for help. Is there anyone with experience in cell tower contracts, RF exposure mitigation, telecommunications law, or situations like ours who might be able to offer guidance? We are not looking for a fight. We are simply a family trying to protect our health while holding on to the home and legacy we’ve worked so hard to build. If there is a way to make our home a place where we feel safe raising our children again, we desperately want to find it. We would be incredibly grateful for any connections, resources, or direction you could offer. Thank you for taking the time to hear our story.

With the insane major push to build hyper scale data centers, a push that goes with them are the high voltage 765 kv power lines. There are very few of these in existence and essentially very limited studies regarding power lines at all and no long term scientific evaluations. Before these lines and hyper scale data centers are forced upon us, a complete and thorough scientific, unbiased evaluation needs to be made. This push with no accountability is not just unacceptable, it defies logic at all levels. The only thing it does is put dollars in large corporations pockets. Where are the wildlife studies? The studies for farm animals? Habitat? No one taking any responsibility that is ruining our country and harming everything and everyone we know. Stray voltage is a real thing, and the lawsuits and awards are reflecting that. The explanation being farm animals are closer to it and on their feet? What about the children and pets they play outside? What about the increased diseases? What about getting shocked when touching wet ground or working in a barn? This should not be an afterthought. Full and complete independent studies that include long term results should be done now and stop the cart before the horse. There will be nothing left of our great state of Wisconsin or the United States. Greed needs to be left out of the equation.