Proposed biological mechanisms

See attached file(s) A Narrative Review on the Influence of Electromagnetic Fields Below 100 kHz on the Endocrine System 2026 Abstract Background: Extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMFs), generated mainly by power infrastructure and household devices, have raised scientific interest due to their potential impact on the endocrine system. Animal research consistently shows effects on melatonin secretion, stress hormone levels, thyroid activity, and reproductive function—largely mediated by oxidative stress and calcium ion imbalance. In contrast, human studies remain inconsistent, often hindered by methodological limitations and insufficient exposure characterization. Objective: This review synthesizes experimental and epidemiological studies examining low-frequency electromagnetic field exposure (≤100 kHz) and its influence on hormonal regulation. Methods: A bibliometric analysis highlights focused interest on specific endocrine targets, particularly the pineal gland. Importantly, many experimental studies use field strengths above those found near high- voltage power lines, limiting direct applicability. Conclusions: While a definitive causal link has not been established, the widespread exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields justifies precautionary considerations. Several important research gaps remain, many of which are identified in this review. The topic of low-frequency electromagnetic field effects on the endocrine system requires more rigorous, long-term human studies with accurate exposure assessment. Keywords: electromagnetic field; endocrine system; hormones; cancer; EMF exposure

See attached file(s) Mobile telephony radiation exerts genotoxic action and significantly enhances the effects of gamma radiation in human cells 2024 Abstract. I previously reported chromosomal damage in human peripheral blood lymphocytes (HPBLs) induced by: a) mobile telephony (MT) electromagnetic fields (EMFs)/electromagnetic radiation (EMR), b) a high caffeine dose, and c) the combination of the two stressors. HPBLs from the same subjects exposed to gamma radiation at doses 0.1, 0.3, or 0.5 Gy, displayed more aberrations than those exposed to MT EMFs or the high caffeine dose in a dose-dependent manner. When the cells exposed to these gamma radiation doses were pre-exposed to a single 15-min MT EMF exposure, the number of aberrations increased significantly more than the sum number of aberrations induced by the individual stressors in all subjects. Thus, MT EMF exposure at a power density ~136 times below the latest International Commission on Non- Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) exposure limit, apart from the fact that it is genotoxic by itself, significantly enhanced the genotoxic action of gamma radiation. Since gamma radiation at similar doses is applied for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, people should be aware of the increased risk during treatment periods. Comparison of the genotoxic action between MT EMF and gamma radiation shows that the ICNIRP limits are, at least, ~4.5×104 times less stringent than the limits for gamma radiation. Key words: Electromagnetic fields — Mobile phone radiation — Gamma radiation — Human lym- phocytes — Chromatid aberrations — DNA damage

One thing I would like HHS to look into are the Body Scanners at airports. Can they cause cancers? I remember reading a decade ago or more that they could impact your DNA in a very negative way. See: https://davidwolfe.com/blogs/learn/study-airport-body-scanners-effect-dna

As a concerned mother and retired elementary-school teacher, I urge FCC to take a strong stance protecting public health by updating our current exposure-guidelines to appropriate safety levels that protect our people. Wireless radiation standards haven’t been updated by FCC since 1996. Given that the ‘safe’ level established in 1996 already surpassed the evidence-based threshold-of-harm that thousands of scientific studies indicated, and given that we and our children are now in a wireless environment bombarded with higher and higher levels of radiation – cell-phone grids, wireless phones, Smartboards, plasma TV’s, computers, wireless Internet, ear phones, etc. – the public, especially children and elderly, are being subjected to an ever-increasing virulent and toxic soup of radiation exposure. And it is having dire consequences. Children are demonstrating increasing levels of agitation, distractibility and sleeping disorders (from the students I taught back in 1978), due to wireless overstimulation. There is also mitochondrial damage from over-exposure. Recently, five wireless meters were added to end of my building, and my sleeping patterns have been affected. Further, adults and senior citizens are increasingly complaining of balance and disorientation issues that often result in serious injuries. Humans are electromagnetic beings, just like other animals, and in the same way that geese or whales are disrupted in migratory routes by an overload of wireless radiation, humans are adversely impacted, as well. These reckless dangers must stop. Our exposure guidelines are archaic and do not reflect the wireless soup in which we’re immersed. Please protect public health by updating our current exposure-guidelines to appropriate safety levels that protect our people.

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. AI Overview: Wireless devices emit low-intensity radiofrequency (RF) radiation (a form of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields) to transmit data. Major health organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration state that current scientific evidence does not conclusively prove that low-level RF exposure causes adverse health effects or cancer. However, independent researchers, public health groups, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer note several potential and debated risks. Main Health Risks and Studies • Carcinogen Classification: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as a Group 2B "possible carcinogen" based on limited evidence in humans and animal studies linking heavy, long-term cell phone use to certain brain tumors (such as malignant gliomas and non-malignant acoustic neuromas). • Animal Studies & DNA Damage: The U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found clear evidence of heart tumors (schwannomas) and some evidence of brain and adrenal gland tumors in male rats exposed to high levels of cell phone RF radiation, along with signs of cellular DNA damage. • Oxidative Stress: A large portion of peer-reviewed laboratory studies indicate that low-intensity RF radiation can trigger oxidative stress (an imbalance of free radicals and antioxidants), which may lead to cellular or tissue inflammation and disrupted cell signaling. • Symptom Reports: Some individuals report physiological symptoms—such as headaches, chronic fatigue, sleep disturbances, agitation, and tinnitus—that they attribute to close or prolonged exposure to mobile phones, Wi-Fi routers, and cellular base stations, though conditions like "electromagnetic hypersensitivity" are not formally recognized by mainstream health consensus as directly caused by EMF fields. • Reproductive & Developmental Concerns: Certain studies point to potential drops in sperm count and motility from carrying phones in pants pockets, as well as possible developmental or behavioral impacts tied to early-life exposure. Vulnerable Populations • Children and Pregnant Women: Children absorb proportionally higher amounts of RF radiation into their brain tissue and bone marrow than adults because they have thinner skulls, smaller head sizes, and higher tissue water content. I hope that HHS will use this opportunity to create a comprehensive report on the current medical, biological, and public health knowledge regarding these effects and take action on the findings. Please consider the experiences of those affected by this radiation as part of what is reviewed to come up with what should be the scientific underpinnings to actual protective standards and action by the federal government.

There are many studies regarding wireless radiation. Here are two for your consideration. The public deserves to be informed of dangers, and deserves to learn ways to mitigate cellular damage, especially for children, who are more effected because their brain cells are still developing. Thank you or looking into the dangers of wireless radiation. God Bless! A Narrative Review on the Influence of Electromagnetic Fields Below 100 kHz on the Endocrine System https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/16/10/4910 Due to the ubiquity of low-frequency electromagnetic fields in everyday human environments, exposure to them is largely unavoidable. Their biological effects are still not fully understood. This work analyzes the relationship between low-frequency electromagnetic fields and the human endocrine system. As the endocrine system is responsible for regulating and maintaining the human body, its potential dysregulation may result in significant adverse health effects. This manuscript summarizes the existing studies addressing this topic and highlights several promising directions for future research. Mobile telephony radiation exerts genotoxic action and significantly enhances the effects of gamma radiation in human cells https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38099580/ Experimental animal studies and in vitro (cell culture) investigations constitute the majority of the research indicating that EMFs can influence hormone secretion and alter various cellular processes [2]. These controlled environments offer significant advantages, allowing for precise control over exposure conditions, including frequency, intensity, duration, and waveform, and enabling detailed investigation of underlying biological mechanisms at the cellular and molecular levels [4]. Consistent observations from these models include: • disruption of melatonin secretion from the pineal gland [13], • alterations in HPA axis activity and levels of stress hormones such as corticosterone and ACTH [4], • changes in thyroid hormone production, specifically fT4 [17], • adverse impacts on reproductive function, encompassing disruptions to the estrous cycle, changes in sperm quality, and altered hormone levels [2], • identification of underlying cellular changes, such as increased oxidative stress, altered ion channel activity, and DNA damage, which provide mechanistic explanations for the observed endocrine disruptions [3]. The consistency of findings across numerous animal and in vitro studies, particularly regarding specific endocrine disruptions and underlying cellular mechanisms like oxidative stress and ion channel modulation, establishes a strong mechanistic plausibility for ELFEMF effects on the endocrine system.

I writing in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am concerned member of the public. The current FCC standards are based on a 1977 study involving eleven rats, a 1982 study involving five rhesus monkeys, one squirrel monkey and one rat, and a 1984 study involving five rhesus monkeys. These studies exposed tiny samples of animals to short durations of RF radiation — as in, 40 to 60 minutes — and did not look at the impact of chronic exposure to RF radiation. The RF radiation signals used in the experiments were not like current wireless signals, which are quite complex with modulation and pulsations, waveform characteristics understood to make them more bioactive.

I am sensitive to WiFi, Bluetooth and cellphone radiation and have had to reorder my life around avoiding it and minimizing exposure (it has a cumulative effect, so as long as my home environment has low levels of RF (wired Internet) etc., I can manage day-to-day exposures). If I hold my phone in my hand for too long, I feel electric charge build up in my arm and neck. If I have to use WiFi to complete a task, my whole body shudders when I turn it off. I get heart palpitations from these things, I sometimes can't be in other people's spaces. I've had to sleep in the car when sleeping at places with WiFi or I ask to unplug it. I always unplug WiFi at hotels. I have purchased products to mitigate exposures. I had to break a lease once because of it and had to sleep in the car during the dead of winter. This has been going on for over a decade and I've experienced that people don't believe me, so I no longer talk about it, but have gone to great lengths to structure my life in such a way to tolerate what I am exposed to. It seems like an issue with oxidative stress buildup. If there's anything that the government can do to regulate EMF pollution, everyone would likely benefit; not just the canaries in the coal mine. Non-human lives as well.

My name is Mayer Mayerfeld. I became certified as a Building Biologist Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist in 2022, after apprenticing and working for another Building Biologist for 4 years. I live in Brooklyn, New York and conducted several hundred Building Biology EMF assessments between 2018 and and 2022, in the Tristate region. Since 2022,rather than conducting individual assessments, I have decided to focus on research to become a more proficient expert with an eye to educating the public about this very important environmental pollutant and hopefully to influence public policy to curtail it. Radio Frequency Radiation/R.F./Wireless Microwave Radiation Communication is one of the 4 types of Man Made EMF that are often the focus of concern. The others 3 would be AC Magnetic Fields, AC Electric Fields,and Dirty Electricity - High Frequency Voltage Transients. In addition to these 4 types of EMF, Artificial light which is also an EMF, is a very important part of the picture. I would like to start with the conclusion of the NIEHS Rapid Report from 1999 and Its Working Group from 1988 cited by Kavet et al in regards to contact current. "In addition to these relative aspects of dose, the absolute (as well as modest) level of contact current modeled (18 μA) produces average electric fields in tissue along its path that exceed 1 mV/m. At and above this level, the NIEHS Working Group [1998] accepts that biological effects relevant to cancer have been reported in "numerous well-programmed studies". The effects the Working Group cites are "increased cell proliferation, disruption of signal transduction pathways, and inhibition of differentiation". The NIEHS endorses this conclusion in its final EMF RAPID report [1999]. So we see that the US government knew back in 1999 that an 18 microamp / 1millivolt per meter electric field can cause cancer. Although Kavet was discussing contact current, The Late Dave Stetzer,a senior expert in the IEEE, explained that you can induce an an 18 microamp current by means of capacitive coupling to the Dirty Electricity in the electric field from home wiring. A fair question is if it can cause cancer,what else might it be causing? Dr Samuel Milham M.D. a career epidemiologist, has published numerous papers and a book on the subject. He came to the conclusion that all modern diseases such as Cancer,Heart Disease,Diabetes,Depression,Suicide,etc. are due to man made electricity in general and dirty electricity in particular. Dave Stetzer explained that the most bio-active frequencies were between 1.7 kilohertz and 100 kilohertz. This is based on his discussion with Russian Scientists and possibly based on classified information that he had from his time serving in the USAF. That range of frequency is within the RF range and so it is pertinent to the discussion.The problem of High Frequency Voltage Transients is compounded by the fact that the utility companies in all 50 states have been allowed to use the earth as a return circuit, against the rules of the IEEE. Despite being warned decades ago by their own nonprofit research arm - EPRI - that they need to add Neutral return capacity to avoid using the earth as a return circuit, instead the Electric Utilities decided to expose the entire US population to these ground currents. This is a failure of the government to regulate electric power transmission in such a way as to prevent it from being a health hazard. In respect to Microwave wireless communications,most people focus on the power density and or the high frequency aspect of this radiation. However I would like to point out the work of Dr. Dimitris Panagopolous. a Biophysiscist. Among the factors that he says are of concern are the Pulsation and Modulation of the the High Frequency waves with Extremely low frequencies. It is these pulsations and modulations that are in fact the most harmful aspect of wireless communications in his view. I would also Like to point out the work of the Late Arthur Firstenberg and his very well researched book The Invisible Rainbow. One aspect that he focuses on is the deleterious effect of Man Made Electric Fields on the Electron Transport Chain. He also cites numerous examples of how in addition to Human Health, Man Made EMfs are causing Bird,Amphibian, and insect die-offs, as well as harming Plants and Trees. It should be noted that many so called Green Technologies, although credited with lowering Carbon Dioxide, are actually doing far more harm to the environment and the climate with EMFs. For Example Solar Panels. They produce large amounts of Dirty Electricity. I would also like to cite the voluminous work of Dr. Jack Kruse a Neurosurgeon and Quantum Biologist especially with his focus on how Man Made EMFs or as he terms it Non Native EMFs negatively impact the Electron Transport Chain in Humans. I conclude with the call Of Arthur Firstenberg: At the very least Mankind must go back to 1995 levels of RF.