Proposed biological mechanisms

I do not believe these technologies are safe for us. I do not trust long established standards and parameters set by institutions with conflicts of interest toward their development. believe we need to look at the research of Dr. Martin Pall, Dr. Jack Kruse, Dr. Robert Becker and others. These devices and frequencies have significant impact on our cells, melatonin levels, sleep quality, nervous system, cognitive function, circadian rhythms, and recovery. They also greatly increase our risk of chronic disease. Historical benchmarks are too conservative and only look at the limited lens of heating of tissues and ionizing radiation. Non-ionizing radiation emitted from them is also harmful. I have felt the effects myself and can measure with a personal EMF meter to confirm symptoms + exposure. I often get debilitating headaches if using devices too long and close to head, nearby source, and being near cell towers. Please do the right thing and regulate these technologies to become aligned with our biology. With its unique position geopolitically, America must be a leader in this direction globally.

A recent study by Yale researchers published in Cell Reports found that exposure to wireless radiofrequency (RF) radiation — emitted by cell phones, cell towers, and Wi-Fi — interfered with neurodevelopment and increased the expression of autism-related genes in laboratory models of the fetal brain. This was a state-of-the-art study using human cortical organoids — tiny, lab-grown models of the developing human brain. Created from stem cells, these organoids form many of the same early brain structures seen in a fetus. They are not full brains and have no consciousness, but they closely mimic early fetal brain development, and scientists use them to study how environmental exposures such as air pollution, microplastics, and diesel fuel could impact the brain. The experiments used a wireless transmitter operating at Bluetooth frequency and power, at exposure levels 4,000 times lower (0.025%) than the FCC’s limit for allowable human exposure to RF wireless radiation. “Our findings revealed that RF-exposed cortical neurons exhibited increases in Autism Spectrum Disorder-associated gene expression and dendritic spine density, characteristics of patients on the autism spectrum.” How 'bout a garage door opener that turns out to have v. strong wifi. I felt it even outside the garage by a least 10 feet, so I wonder how the person whose bed it's underneath will be affected? Techs wouldn't come and replace it w. a difft one because they said it's now "used," even tho it was only their testing of it that made it used... Same w. banks of SCE "smart meters," 5 of which are housed next to one apartment. 2 successive tenants got nasal infections requiring heavy antibiotic usage while subsisting next to them. Infections awfully close to the brain. I am the only person in the building who "opted out" with a pretty hefty financial penalty. I keep my cell phone on airplane mode at all times, unless I need to make a text or speaker-call, which is very rarely. My office computer, and a monitor in the living room for Netflix, are both hardwired via ethernet, w. the modem way out at street level so I don't feel it. Electromagnetic Sensitivity (EMS) is a federally recognized condition by which individuals suffer adverse health effects due to electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. It is also commonly referred to as Electrosensitivity, Electro-hypersensitivity (EHS), microwave syndrome/illness and radiofrequency sickness. I do support the commission’s enunciated goals for advancing “equity in the provision of and access to digital communication services and products for all people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability.” But I also believe that forcing exposure – even as part of a genuine effort to provide broadband access – is itself a form of discrimination as a matter of law. More importantly, it is fundamentally inequitable because it leads to great harm: people with severe symptoms are functionally excluded from public participation since almost all public spaces are flooded with RF, and those with wireless facilities nearby cannot even take refuge in their homes. Ethernet is cheaper more secure and physically safer than wifi, which most tech pros will affirm.

I am submitting this comment as a consumer concerned about long-term exposure to wireless radiation from phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other connected devices. I urge HHS to conduct the same thorough independent review of exposure limits as other respondents have suggested, however. my most pressing concerns lie within groups of already compromised and vulnerable people. Any review undertaken by HHS needs to consider those most heavily exposed, the most severely impacted, and needs to examine effects beyond tissue heating. Please prioritize research that reflects how people actually encounter wireless radiation: repeated exposure over many years, often from multiple sources and devices used close to the body. Assessments should consider signal strength, pulse patterns, duration, and combined exposure. The papers by Melnick and Moskowitz (2026 analysis of animal data)(https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6), Lai and Levitt’s review of technical features of wireless exposures (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps with her proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583) warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence. Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups: especially vulnerable groups of people with a history of head injury. I ask that exploration be made into links between shearing injury (DAI, TAI, and CHI) and CTE (or TES, Traumatic Encephalopathy Syndrome) from exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation and the ensuing VGCC activation (indicated by Martin Pall, 2022 in"Low Intensity Electromagnetic Fields Act via Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel (VGCC) Activation to Cause Very Early Onset Alzheimer's Disease: 18 Distinct Types of Evidence", https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35114921 ). It is my personal observation that the causal relationship between RFR and Alzheimer's may extend to another Tauopathy, TES (or CTE). If I were to describe my experience after a shearing injury, it would be decades of pain and impairment via exposure to wireless, cellular, microwave, flickering lights operating in radio spectrum speed, and other RFR... decades of pain and impairment after exposure to radio frequency radiation, most probably because of VGCC activation, similar to post concussive syndrome. Or as frequently repeated post concussive events. Maybe that leads to CTE. Thank you for your attention.

If your TV remote can't send a signal to your TV to change the channel, it seems obvious that other wireless signals traveling all around us can affect our brains.

I want to share here what recent modern radiation (5G, various microwave towers, radio frequency, WiFi, etc.) exposures have done to my health and the health of others I know and have worked with. The body has never in its entire evolution, experienced something so foreign as our modern day, electromagnetic fields and radio frequency radiation. Our bodies respond as if the incoming signal were an invader. The result can be a range of symptoms that can then result in myriad health problems, many of which can be quite devastating. There is clinical data that shows certain forms of radiation cause cancer in human humans and animals! Within seconds of EMF or radio frequency exposure, the body recognizes at a cellular level the need to protect itself from attack. Unfortunately, the protein coating on each cell in the human body cannot recognize these forms of radiation because our bodies did not evolve to recognize these unnatural signals. I have personally experienced many negative effects of exposure to modern cell towers, microwave towers, and other radio frequency and wireless radiation. I know many other people who have experienced these effects, including many of my clients in my private practice as a Nutritional Therapy Practitioner and Healing Arts Practitioner. These negative effects and symptoms include but are not limited to: nausea, headache, migraines, fatigue, dizziness, sleeplessness, and chronic insomnia, skin rashes, sore and or chronically dry eyes, vertigo, heart palpitations, and anxiety. As a health practitioner that cares deeply about my own health, as well as the health of others, I am deeply concerned about the ongoing implementation of stronger and stronger forms of radiation in and around our neighborhoods, schools, on public transportation, commercial and private aircraft, and various other places on our precious Earth! We have yet to even know the full ramifications of these types of radiation exposures to our animals, and all the creatures and plant life in the wilds of our world. We must stop the ongoing implementation of these dangerous forms of radiation!

See attached file(s) I know exactly why the digital waves are dangerous. I know exactly why the digital waves are dangerous. I know the link and I Have the proof. ANSES is the French agency that gives a simple opinion to the government (to which it is subordinate) on the dangerousness of environmental pollution, including that of digital waves. Our association is on the dialogue committee with this agency. Why do certain waves affect us and not others? First of all, because it is related to the nature of the pulsed multiplexed modulation of digital waves. The power indicator (SAR, absorbed energy...) serves to determine whether a person is exposed or not. This power indicator is also an indicator of harmfulness, but it has become a diversion, a deception because it is confusing compared to other indicators that are much more harmful, never measured. The main indicator of harmfulness is related to the pulsed effect of the pulsed multiplexed modulation multiplied by the type of digital coding QAM. The more data transfers you have, the more the wave will be pulsed modulated and therefore dangerous. A digital wave that does not transfer data, its carrier is analog and therefore non-digital (hence the biases of protocols led by researchers while omitting the essential, the pulsed effect). One must set aside the power and access its understanding on the inductions that enter into a completely different domain (even if the conditioned reflex of most people is to relate everything to power). Digital modulation is based on 0 and 1 (nothing or everything) which generates BRUTAL variations of significant electromagnetic flux, amplified with multiplexing and certain digital codifications. Note: it is not the cumulative effect of the energies of the subcarriers of the waves with enormous peaks of intensity, but the BRUTAL variations of electromagnetic flux intensity (notably the magnetic part that interests us). (the slope of the curve translated by the integral of the derivatives or by the peak crest x peak crest (PAPR) or more simply in relation to the flow of the number of bytes transmitted). Indeed, even if a magnet is of high power, if its flux does not vary, then nothing happens in a coil that is nearby. But if we have a sudden displacement of the magnet and thus of its magnetic flux in relation to the coil, then an induced current is created in the coil (by the laws of Faraday and Maxwell, universally recognized and therefore no need to provide proof) which will itself create a magnetic field to oppose the variation of flux that initiated it. (action – reaction). We find this brutality of variations of the field with the digital waves that are pulsed and multiplexed. The modulation of the wave is low frequency and thus the equivalent of the energy of the modulation will penetrate deeply into the body, and as it is pulsed, it will create inductions: induced currents and ion sequestrations (very sensitive to electromagnetic fields). As our body manages external aggressions through bioelectrochemical equilibrium reactions (homeostasis), it must not be disturbed by wandering induced currents or by ion sequestrations due to the fields. Examples: - The voltage-dependent channels of cells like synapses that allow ions to enter the cell or not depending on the voltage between the two environments on either side of the cell wall. They would be totally disturbed by these induced currents creating cellular mortality. - If the ions are sequestered by the variations of fields and thus not available, the equilibrium reactions cannot take place, leading to oxidation, migraines, etc., degradation of health. The ANSES has just published a report on waves and cancer in November 2025 with a pre study that was accessible to us. When we look into the development of the report, we see many studies that present health issues. I examined the waves and cancer report to classify all the studies presented from the WHO, etc., into two categories of studies: those with pulsed modulation (digital) and those with continuous waves (analog). So simply, we can read (and everyone can read): That half of the studies conclude that there are carcinogenic or dangerous consequences. That half of the studies use digital waves in their protocol and the other half use analog waves. That 100% of the studies using pulsed digital waves report a danger. That 100% of the studies using analog waves report "no" danger. That all these analog studies have no place in this report. That is why only the studies using pulsed digital waves remain, which conclude with a danger. That all the analog studies (thus non-pulsed), by declaring "no" danger, support the conclusion of the harmful effect of the pulsed nature of digital waves by creating inductions due to the abrupt variations in fields of the multiplexed modulation of digital waves.

I had a mouth full of mercury fillings leaching into my bloodstream and high levels of metals including mercury aluminium and silver - I experience static sensations and charges being built up often, I have had to adjust how I live massively as I am detoxing heavy metals but live so close to these towers - I turn my WiFi off completely and used wire connections my garden looks over a massive pylon of 25 or so wires and then just beyond the pylon on top the hill is a massive 5g station hidden in the trees at the highest point of the field out of sight of everyone there are more 5g posts dotted around my area - I am in so much pain an discomfort every day and I know these things affect my peaceful living . I live Cf398bs and I walk this area often to find unusual things

I am submitting information concerning an under-recognized pathway of human exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs), radiofrequency (RF) radiation, and wireless radiation: the presence of permanently implanted dental metals in the oral cavity. Although systematic data on this specific exposure route remain limited, a sufficient body of existing scientific and clinical observations warrants closer examination by the Department of Health and Human Services. Tens of millions of Americans carry conductive metals in their teeth—including mercury-containing dental amalgam, titanium implants, nickel-based crowns and alloys, and other metallic restorations—creating a potential interface between ubiquitous wireless radiation sources and biological tissue that has received little formal attention. Given the scale of this population and the permanence of these materials, further investigation is both warranted and overdue.

Scientific literature, with no conflicts of interest, shows that even below the limits defined by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, microwaves from telecommunication technologies cause numerous health effects: neurological, oxidative stress, carcinogenicity, deoxyribonucleic acid and immune system damage, electro-hypersensitivity. The majority of these biological effects of non-thermal microwave radiation have been known since the 1970s. Detailed scientific, political, and military documents were analyzed. Most of the scientific literature comes from PubMed. The other articles (except for a few) come from impacted journals . The rare scientific documents that were not peer reviewed were produced by recognized scientists in their fields. The rest of the documentation comes from official sources: political (e.g., European Union and World Health Organization), military (e.g., US Air Force and NATO), patents, and national newspapers. (1) Since their emergence, the authorities have deployed and encouraged the use of wireless technologies (2G, 3G, 4G, WiFi, WiMAX, DECT, Bluetooth, cell phone towers/masts/base stations, small cells, etc.) in full awareness of their harmful effects on health. (2) Consequences of microwave radiation from communication networks are comparable to the effects of low-power directed-energy microwave weapons, whose objectives include behavioral modification through neurological (brain) targeting. Above 20 gigahertz, 5G behaves like an unconventional chemical weapon. (3) Biomedical engineering (via graphene-based nanomaterials) will enable brain-computer connections, linked wirelessly to the Internet of Everything through 5G and 6G networks (2030) and artificial intelligence, gradually leading to human-machine fusion (cyborg) before the 2050s. Despite reports and statements from the authorities presenting the constant deployment of new wireless communication technologies, as well as medical research into nanomaterials, as society’s ideal future, in-depth research into these scientific fields shows, above all, an objective linked to the current cognitive war. It could be hypothesized that, in the future, this aim will correspond to the control of humanity by machines.

I am submitting this comment as a mother, a resident of rural Alaska, and a person living with a brain tumor diagnosis. In January 2025, I was diagnosed with an IDH-mutant astrocytoma, WHO grade 2, in my left frontal lobe. I underwent an awake craniotomy and tumor resection in August 2025 and continue regular neurological and MRI surveillance. A new cellular communications tower is now nearing completion approximately 500–700 feet from my home in my small rural Alaska community. I am not claiming RF radiation caused my brain tumor or that this tower will cause recurrence. Instead, my diagnosis and the construction of this tower have led me to a question for which I have had difficulty finding adequate research: What do we know about long-term RF exposure in people who already have cancer? Much of the RF/cancer discussion focuses on whether RF exposure can initiate cancer. Cancer patients need another question investigated: whether chronic RF exposure has any measurable effect on existing tumor cells, tumor progression, recurrence, treatment response, neurological symptoms, or long-term outcomes. I urge HHS to specifically study RF exposure in people with existing cancer and cancer survivors, including patients with primary brain tumors. Research should examine tumor progression and recurrence, molecular and cellular effects, oxidative stress and inflammation, blood-brain barrier effects, tumor microenvironment, seizure activity, treatment response, and survival. If rigorous research demonstrates that typical environmental RF exposure has no meaningful effect on these outcomes, that information would itself be extremely valuable. Patients need reliable evidence either way. I also ask HHS to investigate whether medically vulnerable populations respond differently to chronic RF exposure and whether existing standards adequately protect people with cancer or neurological disease, children, and people experiencing decades of exposure. Children deserve particular attention because today’s children may experience wireless exposure throughout nearly their entire lives. HHS should investigate potential biological effects occurring below levels that cause significant tissue heating and determine whether any observed effects translate into clinically meaningful health consequences. Research should consider cumulative exposure from cellular towers, phones, Wi-Fi, small cells, connected devices, and future technologies. I also encourage HHS to examine infrastructure siting. When transmitting equipment is placed near homes, schools, childcare facilities, playgrounds, or healthcare facilities, communities should have independent, evidence-based health guidance, particularly when reasonable alternative locations exist. Small communities should also have access to independent RF expertise rather than relying primarily on information provided by telecommunications companies or citizens attempting to interpret highly technical research themselves. I strongly encourage meaningful post-installation RF monitoring. Distance from a tower alone does not determine exposure. Antenna height, orientation, frequencies, power, terrain, and other factors matter. Residents should have access to understandable measurements of actual RF exposure after equipment becomes operational. Finally, I ask HHS to clearly distinguish between evidence that an exposure is harmful, evidence that it is safe, and circumstances where sufficient evidence does not yet exist. For someone already diagnosed with a brain tumor, the question is not simply, “Can RF radiation cause cancer?” We also deserve an evidence-based answer to: “Does chronic RF exposure matter once cancer already exists?” I do not know the answer. That is precisely why I am asking our federal health agencies to investigate it. Wireless communication is important, particularly in rural communities like mine. Technological progress and public health do not have to be opposing goals. We can benefit from wireless technology while independently studying long-term exposure, identifying potentially susceptible populations, monitoring real-world exposure, and making thoughtful infrastructure decisions. As someone who may spend years living several hundred feet from a cellular tower while undergoing surveillance for progression or recurrence of a brain tumor, I want to know that this question has actually been studied rather than simply assumed. I respectfully ask HHS to make research involving cancer patients, brain-tumor patients, children, and other potentially vulnerable populations a priority. Thank you for considering my comment.