Environmental effects

Bonjour Je témoignage que les ondes non naturelles et même l'électricité "sale" à des effets néfastes voire dangereuses sur m'organise humain Cela m'a causé de nombreux problèmes de santé (coeur, articulaires, insomnies notamment certains jours plus que d'habitude,..) Notamment, la 5G peut être plus dangereux que les précédentes antennes. Mon animal de compagnie a perdu la vie en 6 mois après l'installation de 5G dans mon quartier. Moi-même j'ai eu des douleurs au niveau du col du fémur. Cela ne part avec aucun médicaments ni d'exercice physique. Il faut juste que je quitte mon domicile et partir loin des ondes, mais cela est devenu qui impossible si on recherche la civilisation surtout en France c'est la folie....

I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: While in the military I developed migraines and vertigo that were triggered by high EMF environments. Moreover, It is well know that HF radios in fighter jets cause cancer. Please reference any fighter jet systems manual. We use to call the cone of the antenna in front of the jet the cone of cancer. There are notes, warnings and cautions pertaining to this danger. While there are different frequency ranges to the many avionics in a fighter jet some of these frequency bands reserved for the military have been released for use by the tech industry within the civilian population(Why?). There is a clear safety issue with this current technology please also reference the military studies done on radar operators in the 60's and 70's showing health concerns. It's time to FOIA all government organizations to include the military for all experiments regarding technology using any type of frequency based power. Non ionizing radiation should be looked at differently than ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is more apt to cause damage via thermal heating. Non ionizing radiation is more likely to affect the calcium channels of the body therefore showing damage later in a persons life that is not expressed by thermal damage. Because of this it also tends to affect people in different ways depending on their individual exposures and body type. We know that different types of frequency's can affect a person with more fat differently than someone with less fat. We know a millimeter wave cannot penetrate the body as deep as a longer wave frequency. Therefore more fat could potentially equal more protection against a millimeter wave reaching an organ. This is especially important with children as most do not have the body fat of an adult allowing the millimeter wave to penetrate deeper into their developing bodies. Currently the FCC only looks at ionizing radiation effects, this is pure negligence on the FCC's side as it is common knowledge among anyone that works with avionics that there are other dangers to frequency then just ionizing radiation as I explained above. This issue is going to have the most damaging effects on our children. It's time to start caring about our future generations and immediately stop any further roll out of cell towers and wireless technologies, remove all antennas from schools, remove wifi from schools and cease the use of 3g/4g/5g towers within our cities until the FCC does its job and does a complete overhaul of its safety standards to reflect measuring all the dangers that can result from this use of technology. The FCC must also ensure the Tech companies are held to the strictest 3rd party study's to ensure what they are proposing is safe. Then the FCC must remove all employees with conflicts of interest ensuring no industry employees are allowed to ever work for the FCC or vice versa. Or at least have a 5 year no compete agreement in their contracts. The FCC should also be required to work with HSS. The HSS should study the health effects and then the FCC must be required to update its standards to ensure the dangers Identified by HSS are addressed in their safety standards. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.

I am submitting this comment as someone concerned about the health effects of wireless radiation as well as the effects on the environment. Personally, there have been numerous times I've been exhausted after just a few minutes on my phone, or a computer where I felt fine before using it. I've heard this same story from dozens of people.

I am writing this to urge you to adopt a regulatory profile that would significantly reduce EMF radiation. Furthermore, I also urge robust independent biophysical research to be performed to asses EMFs impacts upon humans and other living organisms.

My family would like to know about short and long term EMF exposure from large power lines running near our home. There is a purposed route 250ft from our home for a grid growth project in Ohio (Greentown-Thistlewood (OH) 765-KV Line Project) and the grid company claims there is no threat to being so close. But if you stand under these lines with a fluorescent light bulb it lights up. I’m not believing there are no short or long term health effects to the environment or ourselves. We have a 15 month old son and plan to have more kids in the future. We are very scared and concerned about the unknown effects of EMF exposure from such power lines so close to our home. Thank you.

Thank you Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the staff of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for at long last offering the general public as well as medical and scientific professionals the opportunity to inform you of the many adverse effects of RF/EMF infrastructure and devices. I am a U.S. citizen, writing as an individual consumer, who has been researching these adverse effects (with others who are equally knowledgeable and pro-active) for 7 years. I have written a number of Op-Ed submissions to my local newspaper, as well as made oral and written comments to my city council, RI General Assembly representatives, and to my federal Representative and Senators. Rather than summarize all of this work, I will attach them to this public comment. I will be addressing the following numbers as delineated in the Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure: #3. a.—focusing on cell tower placement, small cell antennas on utility poles in front of homes and schools, Wi-Fi, smart phones, cordless phones, so-called Smart Meters, and the wireless mesh required to run these meters #5—the total inadequacy of the 1996 FCC exposure guidelines (as well as the ICNIRP guidelines) to protect the public and the organic environment #9—exposure-related information should be disclosed to consumers, residents, workers, schools, healthcare providers, and local governments #10—the need for disease registries and environmental monitoring and reporting #11—pregnant women, embryos/fetuses, children, adolescents, adults, the elderly, those with implanted devices, and those with preexisting medical conditions all need to be considered #12—scientific evidence has existed for decades that establish harm from exposure many times lower than the 1996 guidelines Please read and consider all of the testimony presented to you and acknowledge that the FCC’s1996 radiation exposure guidelines must be revised to protect human health and the organic environment. Attachments: White Paper on Scientific Evidence of Harm from Smart Meters Links to Op-Ed Submissions Written and Oral Comments to the RI Department of Environmental Management/Office of Air Resources Re: Sources of Air Pollution on the Pastore Center Campus

I am submitting this comment as someone concerned about the health effects of wireless radiation as well as the effects on the environment. The available literature is conflicting regarding EMF exposure and health effects. While many published studies conclude that there are no adverse health effects from established acceptable levels of EMF exposure, others conclude that adverse health effects may result from long-term exposure to high level EMFs. Until ultimately EMF exposure can be verified to be safe for human/environmental exposure, a cautious approach is the only prudent option.

For years,I have researched the damage done to humans and all biological life forms from the excessive amount of EMFs, RF and wireless radiation exposure in our environment. I protect myself with various devices, both at home and when leaving the house. They are like invisible spider webs, all around us, and are major health disruptors, and cause harm to all living things.

My name is Frederick P Sinclair Jr I am a retired Soil and Water Conservationist who for thirty five years tended to resource protection as leader of the Conservation District covering over 600,000 acres within Allegany County NY. I witnessed the establishment and implementation of of several environmental protection laws and was expert at the application of SEQR in performing evaluation of environmental impact. I served three terms as a Town Supervisor and one term as County Legislator and was on several community organization and regional boards. I am a current resident of the Town of Alfred and nearby to the Village of Alfred that hosts two higher institutions of learning Suny Alfred and Alfred University. When in the illage I am sensitive to the 11 nearby towers and antenna arreays servicing the area. Within a short exposure during school sessions I experience dizziness, arithmias, tinitus, and have to leave the areas of intense exposure. My home is located a mile from the village, however a tower has been retrofitted with 4GLTE and then 5G during my time in this the retirement home for myself and wife. The tower is 2,000 feet from my home and 3000 feet in elevation, servicing a broad area. I was on the Town Planning Board when they tower company (near my home) sought a permit for modification and our application of SEQR uncovered enough impacts, to the residential property values, to an organic dairy farm grazing animals within 100 yards, a large sugarbush producing maple syrup, and dangers to Mercy Flight emergency routes (altimeter impact) and the local municipal airport traffic. The Town justified and NYS DEC published that and environmental impact statement was requested by the Town. Legal threeats forced the Town to not push for the EIS. I have no wiFi in my home and have also opted out of Smart Metering. I have taken several measures to protect against EMR in my home but still experience Tinnitus and occasional arithmias and live in the shadow of exposure to microwave emissions. The question of allthese sources meeting FCC regulations is a bothersome claim when these regulations are 30 years old and the exposures have increased exponentially. The proof of need to examine and update has and is being submitted. The role of HHS and associated agencies is critical in assuring a livable environment in the future.

  I am submitting this comment as an RN concerned about the health effects of wireless radiation as well as the effects on the environment. Please, move forward with authentic research and analysis to create more health and environmental safety measures.