Environmental effects

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 concerned member of the public. 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 concerned member of the public. 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 would like to see the study. Most of all if it is harmful to all of us and then what can be done to protect our children, health, and our environment. Thank you, Yvonne Dalke

To the respectful and understanding reader, First of all, please don’t judge my English, as this is my secondary language. When I was young, my father working in the broadcasting industry, gave our family the love of technology. He believed, like everyone was told, that nnEMF were safe. Having seen a housing opportunity, our whole family moved to a house near huge electric pylons. I lived there for about 10 years. However, I started having health problems on the 5th years. Unfortunately, my father passed away on the 13th year and my mother a bit later, after moving away from this house. A few years later, I started having a permanent headache that wouldn’t go away. I would go to sleep with a headache, then wake up with a headache. I went for a CT Scan and they told me everything was "fine". But it wasn’t fine. Fortunately, I started to have some clues: - My permanent headache went away only when going in the forest, and came back gradually while reentering the city. It occured a few time, but couldn’t understand the link between my headache and the forest. - A long lasting power outage of 5 days, which affected the whole block: no headaches during that time. Headaches came back as soon as the power went back on. This is the moment I understood my headache was linked to electricity, somehow. I wasn’t sure, though, having been told again and again that non-ionizing EMFs were totally harmless. Anyhow, having a better idea of the problem, I tried to get help from professionnals. I thought they would know better than me. After getting next to no help from my doctor and about 7-8 health specialists, that is when I tried to find answers by myself. This led me to a long and enduring path of discovery toward the truth, both for personal and professional reasons. Being a product designer, I use a scientific, neutral and intuitive approach on almost all subjects. So, I did what I normally do when doing research: checking both sides of the argument and trying to spot inconsistencies and biases. I also learned in my career that if you cannot measure it, you cannot improve it. So I started buying various and increasingly expensive EMF meters, covering different frequencies. This led me to understand that there were wiring errors in my house. I also discovered how "noisy" are WiFi and Bluetooth devices. I then tried to turn those antennas off. My headaches went away almost immediately after. Fortunately, I was making progress. Since then the beginning of my then permanent headache, I did more than 3000 hours research of the subject of EMF of many ranges and sources in order to understand the subject thoughly. From my understanding so far, the problem isn’t necessarily nnEMF themselves, but their overabundance. We call that "electrosmog". Don’t get me wrong: I LOVE technology and wouldn’t want to quit my day to day job. It has just became very hard to practice under those conditions. So, my long term goal is to get to know and understand the subject as much as possible in order to create safer products that are respectful of biology, including humans, animals and plants, as I know now that those are affected too. Most of us just aren’t aware. In one line: all lifeforms runs on electricity. Electricity is data. Any change of frequency, energy and vibration is affecting cell at microscopic levels. Under weak non-ionizing nnEMF (WiFi, BT, 60Hz powerline, among others), it first affect blood cells (rouleau formation) after just 10 minutes of exposure but resolves by itself when it stops or if the subject is moving enough to activate blood circulation. However, if someone stand still while using those devices and that it happens all days over a year, bigger problems start appearing. That’s why most lab tests are failing to find evidence: their tests aren’t lasting nearly long enough to find those. Another problem: all cells phones are tested for SAR. Their levels are tested against the FCC rules and they pass it before the product gets released to the public. This is fine by itself. However, when you go inside a cramped bus or subway, those numbers are suddenly going though the roof. Nobody is checking for exposure in those areas. Before concluding, I also met many people having the same problem as me, which was a relief. I must admit though that it wasn’t all good. Many people, including some close friends, didn’t want to believe my story. I had to insist to the point of this health problem nearly breaking our friendship. Thanksfully, I had more listening ears around me than judging ones. Many people are downright hostile toward this unknown problem, as you might have noticed. From what I’ve found so far, what we were told since the 60’ hasn’t evolved much in the public mindset. It even developed as a stigma for many people which will defend heavily wrong theories and assumptions about scientific conclusions driven by the money of the telecom industry. Thanks for caring.

Good morning, I would like to know the EMF effect on humans (I know birds and animals are hurt too) especially Cancer.

I am very grateful that this is being addressed. Thank you for paying attention. This is extremely important my daughter has felt direct physical effect of living in very close proximity to a cell tower. We need to reduce exposure to environment and animals and humans.

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

The current frequencies used for wires communication are damaging life on our planet. Please switch to frequencies that do not damage life on Earth even if they may be less efficient.

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 concerned citizen. I have very important health issues. Wireless tv & other appliances don't work so good anyway. 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. Thank you for your time.

Dear HHS I am writing you that you conduct a full review of Cellular Tower Radiation. My plea includes the visible spectrum as well. It cannot be understated that such a study be undertaken. The Telecommunucations Act is preposterous in excluding health and environmental concerns in consideration of Cellular Communication Facilities. In fact the tolerance level for total radiation is the highest in the world. This is unacceptable; there has now been much study around the world in which human health issues (cancer rates etc) are markedly higher in vicinity of cellular facilities. India, of all places for instance has even provided maps over their dense population centers showing this correlation. There have also been studies indicating disruption to wildlife in multiple ways. I fear that even we are affected living in a good neighborhood because 5G (so called ‘low radiation’) radiation towers have been placed in a grid, while our house is not adjacent to one, I have been told there is nothing you can do if one is. As a Senior. I am not so worried as toward the end of my life my total life exposure may not total enough to be a factor in my decline but now with the cellular proliferation children today are the ones at risk for long term exposure. Is that not obvious when you see cellular transmission shields on top of apt buildings (next to children sleeping in bedrooms) in dense urban areas? It is a shame that our approval-guidelines for so many things are only based on immediate effect but long term exposure is not, so if something doesn’t kill you or effect you immediately it must be harmless. How could Glyphosate have been deemed harmless and approved if the effects of exposure were revealed? Likewise with Teflon, or PFases. I also take exception to the Strobing lights required on cell towers which exceed 200’. All are such eyesores to our landscape and our night skies which we need for peace and serenity instead of this growing phobia. Many of our most notable scenic landmarks and even mountaintops have been literally destroyed by such towers with 24/7 flashing lights. The worse is Sandia peak, Albuquerque NM with many others as well. Do we have any respect for anything anymore? I feel HHS should examine the detrimental effects on mental health by this. In addition the effects on wildlife esp in respect to migration patterns is needed. And there are now even congressional bills proposed to increase the density of cell towers nationwide and would give the FCC total dictatorial control over their placement. Yes there is an answer to much of this and that does not mean a million satellites marring the rest of our night skies and as well for the entire world. And toward the benefit of Americas first minted trillionaire! Fiber optic cable is the best choice. It is cheap, already widespread and can be cheaply installed underground everywhere. Local WiFis can easily be set up everywhere. And today why should cell towers need these offensive strobe lights, cannot airplanes be alerted to towers through nonvisible means? Please help our technology truly serve us and not for its own sake but for ours. Peter C Guynn