We need to regulate wireless technology with non-biased science free of industry influence. I’m someone who is negatively impacted by wireless technology. Smart meters, routers, cell towers, especially 5G cause me fatigue and discomfort. I’ve had to put measures in place to reduce my exposure but that’s not enough. We need strong national regulations to protect children and youth, wildlife, and the public. Polease do all you can to make the regulations as strict and safety conscious as possible. Thank you.
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 parent and protector of ordinary people.
Wireless radiation has affected me and my family personally but also everyone else near a cell tower, 5g, and owners of wifi routers and electronic devices. I support HHS taking an active role in further examining the known 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.
Hello thank you for work there on this and other subjects. Cell and radar and satellites affect health and earth ground weights. The electro media can add to matter weight thru saturation. Cell towers have been over placed in numbers per counties for reduction criteria to be legislated.. I have written to officials that some are right next to residential and buildings. This can along with antennae on the roofs stimulate the grid and structures and wiring and lighting to shed cell media even spraying thru bulbs.. making items last a shorter time. I can feel my brain stiffen near cell towers. During the campaigns too much cellular media is drying my lungs. I’ve campaigned against Junk mail please stop Junk Mail.. on air quality..someday 50 junk mail everyone’s upset online.. I stopped a few meltdowns in Westlake Hills Tx with a Radio President near the Dell’s residence. ..and Dripping Springs Tx near a famous engineering Co I got them to move. There are 3 on 290 right behind handsome homes. I found out the police did not have an emergency list of who to to call about them. I’ve seen elite homes with cell towers next door literally in Heritage Oaks and Vintage Oaks. I called ATT and they and/or Westin Dean a custom home builder..got all cell towers turned way down in settings. There were some I couldn’t even drive by. In Beverley Hills near a hotel there were 15 cell towers near a hotel as well. Some install them for extra money even near poor cows… I write animal activists no improve this. Many could be mandated to be smaller in impact modules. Sometimes it’s their lighting that can ground load and age too bad sockets and timers. I’ve written a public Land trust to start buying land with the public. This to stop those needing money moronically plastering the country with cell towers. Psychologically another blow for humans along with ABombs.. Causing stress and more.. Too much techno media may effect the sun and moon radio waves. Especially during sun storms. Our atmosphere may reflect back to the sun heating it up a tad more with techno media density.... But a sun storm can effect the grid the size of.New York a TV show proclaimed. There are too many playful radio hours allowed and stations at 15,000… I’ve written to have them go to half days at least.. non essential radio. Whisper radar is needed including for weather. It’s heavier than cell media.. We are millivolt systems. And we are getting saturated with techno media. Techno rings can hold weather systems below the planet equator and add to flooding that has caused some evacuations so wrote NOAA. Only a percent of wireless bill pay should be allowed. Techno media can cause heart rates and supposedly cancer to increase. Possibly brain changes as well even at work inside wireless buildings. I can feel some gravity weight increase around some buildings that are all wireless too. The pad sites have a tad more zing and gravity. Stewardship is ascue and needs moderation. Please help the Earth and human standards of conduct to be guided more elitely.. Thank you again for this project your doing. All my best hopes.. to everyone… I want my adult sons and grandkids to believe in this world more. How about youalls families? Resa Bartlett and family.
Hello, I submitted two days ago but forgot to mention some more important information. I mentioned among many things, and apart from wireless radiation, but I also want to add that radar is difficult for us electrosensitive to live by for several kilometers, and electrical cables in the air and along houses since they are so full of spikes these dats from transformers etc etc... They should be either digged down or wired or shielded and better earthed. And also chargers for electric cars are impossible to live close to, even if living on the fourth floor opposite to them in the street. These also need to be better protected. And even 12-volts-fences are harmful for electrosensitive people and hence the animals probably....
And I noticed that the cable connection behind the television for the tv-antennas can also have really high voltage, according to my electrosmog meter. I had to unplug it, but still it emitted something from the antenna hole probably which gave me a headache. And the smart tv:s are awful. People don't know that they are like having a constant wifi / mobile antenna radiating from the television while sitting there like affected zombies for hours ... That is the inbuilt chromecaster that emit a lot of mw/M2, microtesla and voltage, even when the television is on standby. Incredible...
And finally I don't understand why there is no climate discussion about the temperature rise that I am sure is also provoked by the mobile antennas. It's logical, since they emit really high microwaves, which like in a microwave oven heat up the water in our atmosphere. No wonder ut goes so fast now with the melting of the ice bergs ... Can't you just stop it, please!!!
About 12 years ago I attended a city council meeting in San Marino, CA, where parents were hoping to get a cell phone tower removed from the playground at their children’s school. I was appalled to learn that the parents could be sued if they expressed any concern that the tower might in some way impair their children’s health. So all they could do was talk about their fear that it could burn, or fall over, or that it looked unsightly, etc. Of course, the tower stayed.
This is all you really need to know to realize that those who make and enforce our government's regulations have turned a blind eye to the real probability that our health and the health of plants and animals is likely harmed by some of these increasingly ubiquitous RF/EMF fields. One cannot even ask the question!
After learning that I could be sued by the powerful communications industry for expressing concern that cell towers could cause health effects, I tried calling the FCC to ask how they came to the conclusion that RF and microwaves radiating at people were safe. I couldn’t reach a single human being to speak with until I finally selected the choice in the FCC phone menu for those who wanted to buy spectrum. After making this selection, I immediately got an engineer on the line. I explained why I was calling, that I was not buying spectrum but was a concerned citizen, and asked about what research the FCC used to establish safety standards. He told me he felt badly, that likely we needed to study the problem more but it was out of his hands. He told me that there was a group from whom the FCC got their reports on RF and microwave safety. I looked at the website he had mentioned. It described a small firm of 5 women whose mandate was to produce reports which interpreted complex data in their clients’ strategic interests. Wow. We were being sold a bill of goods.
I tried to interest people at Caltech, where I was working, in this problem. I was told by my PI in no uncertain terms that if I took any measurements with an RF meter or EMF meter I would not be able to work in the HIV research lab anymore. I was told people would be upset and I must not bring “that device” (a simple cheap Trifield meter) to work ever again. I was later fired for specious reasons, and banned from talking to anyone in the lab. This felt really creepy. It was quite an education. I became more interested in the problem. The more I learned the more appalled I became.
I appreciate the opportunity to comment. It is not my job to teach you, dear FCC, what you already know: there is something potentially harmful in these energies, else why can we not ask the question at city hall about whether these cell towers on the playground could be harming our kids? You at the FCC already know that you have been encouraging the rapid spread of this powerful addictive technology at the cost of our health and possibly even our climate. You know that in spite of efforts made by you and others to thwart studying this problem, data exists which casts doubt on microwave safety. Why are there articles entitled "The effect of trees on 5G" instead of articles entitled “The effect of 5G on trees"?
At Caltech, before the Covid lockdown, I sat in on a bunch of lectures being given by the sustainability people. No one had incorporated the rapid increase in microwaves in our world in their models of our rapidly warming world. I see evidence around me that cell towers harm and kill trees, and likely, dry the soil, start fires, who knows what. The plethora of satellites that measure the ice depth at the poles shine microwaves in and measure what comes back. The difference apparently tells how thick the ice is. But is this a good thing to do? Could the small amount of microwave energy absorbed by the ice be softening the ice’s surface, changing its albedo, causing more of the sun's energy to be absorbed rather than reflected, leading to further ice melt? Are we in a way opening the oven to make sure the cake hasn't fallen yet when we make these measurements?
We need to do better. We need a consortium of biologists, physicists, climate scientists, and engineers who are not influenced by profit or lucrative data collection schemes to work together to understand the impact of these energies (with which we did not co-evolve) on our health and on the health of our living world.
Thank you for your time.
Hello. I developed an allergy/hypersensitivity to electromagnetic radiation after sleeping for 1.5 years with a wireless router on the wall, directly beneath the head of my bed. However, several other factors contributed—such as stress, an electrical fault in an old PC at work, and spending hours talking on a mobile phone held against my head. I have now become an "environmental refugee," having moved deep into the woods to an abandoned hamlet—a place where I assumed the installation of further mobile masts would never be an issue. It was fine here, with sufficient mobile coverage at a level of 0.1 microwatts per square meter; but now, a 5G mast has appeared on a neighbor’s forested property, effectively turning me into an "indoor cat." If I need to spend any significant time outdoors, or drive out to run errands, I must wear radiation-protective clothing and carry three "Lifetune Zone Max Pro" protective discs. I know that approximately 1 microwatt per square meter is sufficient for mobile coverage, and that is my personal threshold for long-term exposure. I believe that sensitive individuals—as well as animals, insects, birds, plants, and seeds—deserve to have large areas of the planet where they can live in peace, free from electromagnetic pollution (which, these days, involves unnecessarily high levels of radiation). For instance, I once measured pulses of 120,000 micro watts per square meter in a public square in Oslo. Thank you for allowing me to share my opinion and a bit of my story!
Thank you so much for your attention to this matter.
There have been many scientists and studies regarding the harm of wireless frequencies. One harm occurs to the reproductive cells of
The human beings in the range of the wireless frequencies. This damage may not be evident until the egg inside the human exposed becomes of age to reproduce themselves. At this point they may find it difficult to be able to have children. So it may take a generation. Another is to the wildlife such as bees etc.
There are positive frequencies as well such as the Rife machine which information has been suppressed regarding.
But, there are many negatives to wireless frequencies. I have known many people wearing earbuds for extended periods of time that have a white patch of hair behind their ear. It's killing the cells. It's right beside their brain.
Something definitely needs to be done. I pray you'll be successful.
I am sorry to not have seen this in time to review studies and attach relevant ones. Five years ago I delved into numerous studies since a cell tower was about to be installed within a few hundred feet of our residence, in the middle of a residential designated historic district. It was on the edge of a residence with a woman with a pacemaker who was fighting cancer (she died within a few months of the installation) and across the street from a family with an infant. It was demonstrated at a city council meeting that the public works officer responsible for working with the telecom company concerning placement had failed to fulfill requirements for approving cell tower placement, including the review required before placing a cell tower in a historic district (among others). When this was pointed out, and the city attorney was asked to look into this, the cell tower was immediately installed (several weeks before it was scheduled). In addition, no concerns or studies about the deleterious effects of RF's on human health or on the environment was allowed to be cited as a reason for delay or in order to regulate placement of the cell towers. There were numerous studies available then which pointed clearly to the need for a serious review of safety standards, and which also highlighted the negative effects on insects (including pollinators) and migrating birds with regard to navigation and orientation. The amount of money which telecom companies were offering municipalites (where not prohibited) and private individuals in order to install cell towers, and their disregard for property rights in some cases (I know of several) is disturbing. In our city, the first cell towers to be erected were close to the hospital, a public school, a college campus, and a historic residential neighborhood. The restrictions against a municipality considering health or environmental impacts regarding cell towers is itself disturbing. If there is in fact nothing to be concerned about, then why prohibit citing relevant studies. Shouldn't health and environmental safety be top priorities? What are the telecom companies afraid of? Since the FCC has not reviewed its safety standards since 1996, and has been historicaly reluctant to do so, one wonders if the cell tower industry might not be a trillion-dollar juggernaut which our government allows to roll over and disregard even legitimate and documented concerns for human health and for the environment. The consequences for the government continuing to evade the responsibility to provide and enforce safety guidelines, based on serious evaluations of the proposed hazards, could well be devastating for our comunities and ecology in general.
I strongly encourage the HHS and FCC to respond in a serious and earnest way to the Supreme Court mandate issues in 2021.
Respectfully submitted, October 21, 2026
Peer-reviewed Publications on the Health Effects from Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation
Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley
October 21, 2026
This summary synthesizes 18 peer-reviewed scientific publications co-authored by Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, for formal submission to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Much of this work was conducted on behalf of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF).
ICBE-EMF was founded in 2021 after being commissioned by the advisors to the International EMF Scientist Appeal, a petition signed thus far by more than 250 scientists who have published over 2,000 papers on EMF, biology, and health. The commissioners have endorsed the Appeal’s recommendations to protect public and environmental health and, moreover, is dedicated to ensuring the protection of humans and other species from the harmful effects of non-ionizing radiation.
Our primary purpose is to make recommendations, based on the best peer-reviewed scientific research publications, that include, and go beyond establishing numerical exposure guidelines. ICBE-EMF is made up of a multidisciplinary consortium of scientists, doctors and related professionals who are, or have been, involved with research related to the biological and health effects of electromagnetic frequencies up to and including 300 GHz.
For more information see the submissions made on behalf of ICBE-EMF, the International EMF Scientist Appeal, as well as my other submissions.