Children & vulnerable groups

I am writing with praise from Ireland on this vital work for investigation due to my interest in this area after my young child suffered a huge regression after moving next door to an airport. I now know this to be calls “pans” I am hoping that with the progression in this field of study, other countries will be inspired to “catch up” with modern and current research , and even if they choose not to, breakthrough will be possible for the millions of concerned mothers and fathers paying attention to this administration. Thank you

Years ago I had the smart meter on my house removed as an experiment because of my son having immune issues. I thought it would be worth testing it. I had come to realize that the smart meter was on the outside wall of the kitchen where I spent hours per day. I wasn’t expecting anything noticeable at the time but to my surprise, I personally noticed a big difference! My house became “quieter” in my brain sort of thing. I have also been bothered by certain fan frequencies that can get on my nerves. Since living without a smart meter I no longer notice an underlying agitation that I can’t pinpoint. I also do not use wifi in my house. Everyone should be able to opt out of smart meters and the extra cost to read your meter should be less expensive and regulated. Also putting wifi towers next to public schools should be illegal. I’ve read social media conversations from people who are super sensitive to smart meters and cellular towers.

I submit these comments as an individual consumer and concerned family member (Q2). People cannot readily opt out of ambient exposure from nearby antennas. I urge federal agencies to reassess whether existing limits adequately address lifelong, real-world exposures, including for children and ecosystems. Q3–4: Sources of concern include cell towers/small cells, phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, smart meters, and wearables. People report headaches, sleep disruption, fatigue, and other symptoms they associate with RF exposure. Investigate these reports systematically without assuming causation. I report no personal diagnosis or clinical observations. Agencies should collect nonidentifying reports documenting device/source, measured exposure, timing, symptoms, medical evaluation, and changes after exposure reduction, using blinded tests where feasible. Q5–6: Compare FCC limits with ICNIRP 2020 and IEEE standards, WHO reviews, and IARC assessments. Explain how limits address frequency, SAR, power density, modulation, duty cycle, beamforming, distance, exposure duration, and multiple sources. The U.S. National Toxicology Program reported clear evidence of malignant heart schwannomas in male rats under specific high-level RF exposure conditions; these results do not establish risks from everyday 5G exposure. IARC classified RF fields as “possibly carcinogenic” (Group 2B) in 2011. Recent human reviews, however, found no increased risk for several studied cancers. Assess studies below limits and distinguish cellular changes from proven harm. Q7–9: Use calibrated broadband and frequency-selective meters, personal dosimeters, SAR testing, and validated modeling. Measure actual exposures across locations and times, including indoors, during peak traffic, and from multiple sources. Publish accessible antenna locations, operating characteristics, compliance methods, measured exposure ranges, uncertainties, and ways to request independent review. Q10–11: Build privacy-protective surveillance combining cancer registries, occupational and environmental monitoring, longitudinal cohorts, and voluntary adverse-event reports. Investigate clusters with comparison groups; reports are not proof. Biomarkers for individual RF dose are not established. Prioritize children, pregnant people, older adults, workers near transmitters, people with implanted medical devices (including interference risks), and people with preexisting conditions. Evaluate symptoms reported by people identifying as electromagnetically hypersensitive without presuming an RF cause. Q12–13: Investigate reproducible biological findings reported below some limits, while recognizing that a laboratory effect is not necessarily a health hazard. Compare exposure profiles—not merely the number of devices—for 5G, emerging 6G, Wi-Fi, satellites, IoT, wearables, smart homes/cities, autonomous vehicles, wireless medical devices, and smart meters. Exposure characteristics differ. Require updated assessments when technologies change. Q14–15: Fund rigorous studies of pollinators, birds, plants, and livestock, controlling for pesticides, habitat, climate, and other factors. An evidence map found hundreds of studies with quality limitations. Evaluate installations near homes, schools, childcare and healthcare facilities using site-specific measurements, cumulative neighborhood assessments, antenna characteristics, and realistic small-cell operation. Q16–17: NIH should fund independent, preregistered long-term epidemiology, developmental research, animal replication, and mechanistic studies. FDA should evaluate consumer and medical devices; CDC should coordinate surveillance and risk communication. FCC and health agencies should publicly explain how new evidence informs exposure standards and disclose conflicts of interest. Q18: I request (1) a time-bound, public reassessment of RF limits and their treatment of long-term, multi-source exposure; (2) publicly accessible environmental monitoring; (3) special review and community consultation for installations near schools and homes; (4) funding for ecological and human studies independent of industry; (5) practical wired options and clear device settings for consumers; and (6) a transparent process to report concerns and challenge incomplete compliance assessments. The 2021 decision in Environmental Health Trust v. FCC required the FCC to better explain its treatment of certain health and environmental issues; it did not find that 5G causes disease. A rigorous, updated public accounting is necessary. Sources: NTP, Cell Phone Radio Frequency Radiation Studies (2018); IARC Monographs Vol. 102 (2013); ICNIRP RF Guidelines (2020); Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, 9 F.4th 893 (D.C. Cir. 2021); WHO-commissioned systematic review of RF exposure and cancer (Environment International, 2024).

I am a mother of four children, and our family moved into our home on October 1, 2025, approximately 0.2 miles (1,056 feet) from an active cell tower. Since moving here, we have noticed a significant worsening of health concerns within our household, including severe brain fog, frequent migraines, insomnia, difficulty concentrating, and emotional and behavioral dysregulation in our children. One of my daughters also has a serious autoimmune condition involving multiple relapses, hospitalizations, and extensive medical treatment. I worry about whether prolonged environmental exposure could be affecting her health or contributing to immune dysregulation. Beyond our current symptoms, I am deeply concerned about the potential long-term health consequences of continuous RF/EMF exposure, particularly cancer risk, neurological development, reproductive health, immune function, and the cumulative effects of exposure beginning in childhood. I recognize that there is no established causal connection between the nearby tower and our family’s health concerns, nor do we have evidence of cancer related to this exposure. However, the changes we have observed since moving here, combined with the uncertainty surrounding some long-term health outcomes, make me believe further investigation is important. I urge HHS to prioritize independent, long-term studies of residential exposure near cell towers, including cancer incidence, neurological and cognitive health, sleep disturbances, reproductive health, and autoimmune conditions. Families deserve transparent exposure measurements, continued evaluation of safety standards, and research that follows children over many years.

Hello, My name is Carly and I help manage a daycare. A 5g tower was put up directly across the street from our daycare during covid. I know there can be other factors that may be causing this (like food etc) but we have notice a tremendous uptick in adverse behaviors. Kids are biting at a younger age and right now we have an infant class with 9 kids biting, out of 11. Before the tower, we had 1-2. More kids are exhibiting signs of adhd and autism since before the 5g put up during covid. Defiant and overstimulated kids as well. We have had many teachers suffer from migraines and stomach issues. We have had an uptick in difficult parents and teachers, but that might be a society thing. People seem to be less patient and anger easily. I have had a lot of health issues and ear ringing as well since it has been put up. Thank you for studying this! My computer/phone is the same speed it was before the 5g tower so I don’t see the point. Feel free to contact me if you need more information.

It is crimes against humanity to force this experimental radiation on the population. We have God given rights to control what is put in our bodies and that includes radiation. No excuse or “ reason” given by the government or private companies can change this. It is evil and people know it is not for better cell service or needed new technology needed to race to the top ahead of China etc… Your buildout is for mass surveillance & to flip a future switch go activate the cv jab ingredients, to harm us because as we all have been told- “There are too many people on earth.” This is a farce. There is no public “voice in federal decision making.” All govt decisions come from the top of our Uniparty controlled by the Elite. Leave us alone and do your job which is instead, to protect the people. To experiment, especially, on baby and children’s brains is the worse evil.

I am 36, married and have 3 young kids. We moved into a townhome with a cell tower right across the street about 3 months ago. Since that time, we have noticed an array of symptoms in our family- anxiety, numbness and tingling, trouble sleeping, chest pains, and trouble breathing. I am apart of multiple support groups and I cannot tell you how many people have talked about a cancer diagnosis after living or working close to one of these cell towers. We plan to move in a couple weeks. We as a nation have to acknowledge that unfortunately we are not winning the war on cancer. We have to look at what has changed in the last 10+ years? No more land lines, cell phones in EVERYONE’S pocket, 5G towers popping up left and right, WiFi and Bluetooth EVERYWHERE. Please do research, study these devices and technology and how they impact cells. Find places where multiple people suddenly start receiving cancer diagnosis and look at their environment. THANK YOU, truly, for bringing light to this situation, I’m praying there will be regulations and changes <3

Many of us believe that the public is completely unaware of the health risks associated with the technologies we use every day. Smartphones, Wi-Fi networks, Bluetooth devices, Cellular towers, GWEN towers and newer generations of wireless networks, Wearable technologies, Smart meters and connected household devices are of particular concern. But our biggest concern is that children need to be educated on the physiological effects and given tips on how to avoid excess radiation exposure in their everyday lives. And let’s bring back lead-based paint and stop pretending it was banned due to children eating paint chips. :)

I request clear, evidence-based information about the possible health risks associated with exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs), radiofrequency (RF) radiation, and wireless technologies. Please address exposure levels, duration, and multiple sources, as well as potential implications for children, pregnant individuals, and workers with frequent exposure. The assessment should distinguish established risks—such as tissue heating at high RF exposure levels—from possible long-term effects, including cancer risks, that remain uncertain or under investigation. Please also explain how current safety limits are established and recommend practical ways to reduce unnecessary exposure.

To HHS: wireless radiation is a serious Health Risk. I have personally dealt with severe chronic health issues for many years. I'm aware that Radiation exposure has effected my sensistive nervous system affecting sleep, thyroid issues, hormone imbalance, exhaustion, depletion etc... I go to great lengths to reduce exposure and protect myself. It is a constant, daily challenge in this world of increasing bombardment of Radiation Poisoning. I'm also aware it is absolutely possible to make technology safe for health and still effective Studies show oxidative stress (167 abstracts), DNA damage (82), male infertility (44), lipid peroxidation (43), cognitive decline (38), cancers (34), low sperm quality (33), brain cancer (28), headache (20), sleep disorders (15) and fatigue (14). Further down the list: childhood leukemia, acoustic neuroma, salivary gland disease, hearing disorders, ALS, Alzheimer’s, autism spectrum disorders, birth defects, hypothyroidism, autoimmune disease.... 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, families, health care providers, researchers, and scientists with an opportunity to finally be heard on this critical public health issue.