Occupational exposure

anchorage Alaska Beginning of five k erra would have been 2019 before COVID. There was a new tower up at kinkaid I remember going to a biathlon race night under the thing I was so wound up I couldn't race. That day previously I had been working across from West High wear there is another large antenna on the school.( I hope asd is being paid for this) .I was working in a home. A metal trailor. With wooden add on. the owner had a wireless device in one area an alexe and the other side an echo . I was folding towels by a bed when I felt distinct vibrations comming from the school. I bet we were 2000meters away. The client had described this to me before. I was about 47 and was in tip top shape and healthy. I still am it is hard to stay away from. Technologies. I notice more when I have a high acidic level. For my PH Or I am not Grounded. I had a different encounter in Indiana in the morning running in a neighborhood right across from a tower. After running several minutes I had to stop was immediately dry at the mouth and parched. I previously had not had any Diabetic symptoms like dry mouth. These two incidents led me to research of Havana disease or reaction. I did not seek any treatment.

In 2009 I began noticing a reaction to WiFi radiation in my home. It was about 1 yr after I had begun working at home. I was incredibly healthy, was a runner, had been running daily since 1978. No illness, no sensitivities, extremely healthy. But, reactive to EMF's. Please conduct thorough research and implement legislation to properly identify and manage this health hazard. It is real. people are affected by it. Do not sacrifice human health for the profit of big business.

Re: HHS-OASH-2026-0397 - Supplemental explanation of occupational RF site exhibit Prior comment tracking number: mv5-i6d1-04w6 Please consider this supplemental comment with my prior submission identified above. It explains the accompanying "HHS RF site illustration" exhibit, which depicts the University of Illinois/Willard Airport (CMI) radar and communications site in the Champaign-Urbana area of Illinois. I recall the 17-ft platform configuration as approximately 1990-2000; the exact tower-elevation date is unknown. The drawing shows ATCBI-5 after its replacement of ATCBI-3 during that period. It explains the site and simultaneous-source assessment questions. HOW TO USE THE EXHIBIT The accompanying PDF contains Figure 1, equipment and power tables, source context and limitations. Read the numbered work areas together with the figure: radar platform (1), northeast and southeast radio platforms (2 and 3), and equipment shelter (4). Orange identifies the ASR radar and cyan the directional beacon; radio envelopes surround the ground-radio platforms. Figure 1 shows the source patterns together in a schematic simultaneous-source view. It does not establish that every radio channel transmitted at once during a historical task, or that the antenna was stationary and energized. HOW IT WAS CREATED AND WHAT IT USES The exhibit was prepared with three-dimensional computer graphics using my equipment and work-location recollections, stated equipment parameters, schematic site geometry and published technical information. It is not an FAA-produced model, a surveyed site plan or a measurement-based electromagnetic simulation. I recall that ATCBI-3 was replaced by ATCBI-5 while the tower remained in its 17-ft configuration; I do not remember the replacement date. I also recall frequent simulcasting, GRT transmitter output of 10 W per transmitter, and transmission-line loss as high as 2 dB. Exact channel-specific losses and historical simulcast combinations remain unresolved. Power labels distinguish peak and pulse-averaged transmitter output from power reaching a worker. GRT output is 10 W (40 dBm); 2 dB line loss leaves 38 dBm (6.31 W) at the antenna. Radio envelopes are schematic. Channel-specific line losses are unknown; no frequency-dependent loss curve is assigned. The still image does not reconstruct controller-pilot exchanges or historical keying; aircraft emissions are not depicted. The five-channel simulcast grouping is an example. Broad coverage surfaces, fading layers and reflection overlays are illustrative. Dimensions and antenna-center heights remain schematic. NTIA Report 13-490, Table C-1, provides generic ASR-8 context; the illustration uses a 1.35 degrees horizontal beamwidth, while NTIA lists 2.3 degrees for a generic ASR-8. The site-specific beamwidth remains unverified. WHAT IT DEMONSTRATES VHF, UHF and microwave radiation is invisible. I challenge HHS reviewers to imagine themselves at the numbered work areas in Figure 1, with their own bodies among the operating sources. The body encounters the combined environment. Near fields can be strong and uneven; their strength requires task-specific assessment. Ask what reaches the body during repeated maintenance, what shielding provides, and what measurements and health monitoring are needed. The colors make the unseen environment imaginable; they do not quantify bodily exposure. WHAT IT CANNOT DEMONSTRATE The exhibit does not determine my personal RF exposure, establish a limit exceedance, prove disease causation or certify a safe location. Envelope size, color, brightness and overlap are not calibrated field strength, absorbed energy or dose. The 300-ft radar drawing cutoff is not a near-field boundary or the stated 60-nautical-mile service range. The shelter remains a spatial reference, not a realistic view from 60 miles away. Reflection overlays do not solve the indoor field or quantify reflected power. Close-range fields, cabinet leakage, shielding changes, interference and building transmission require separate assessment. Possible equipment-generated X-rays are a distinct ionizing-radiation question and are not modeled here. I ask HHS to use this exhibit as an explanatory aid supporting task-specific assessment, accessible exposure records and meaningful communication of findings to workers and physicians. FAA assessments and occupational-health decisions should account for actual energized maintenance conditions and simultaneous sources. Current and retired technicians should be included in the research and follow-up needed to resolve those questions.

Subject: A Daughter’s Letter of Concern for the HHS Hearing on EMF Dangers and Electromagnetic Sensitivity Dear Members of Congress and Department of Health and Human Services Officials, I am writing as a daughter who has witnessed the devastating impact that my mother’s health struggles have had on her life and our family. I urge you to take seriously the experiences of people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity and investigate the potential health effects of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and electromagnetic fields (EMFs). My mother is an RN, BSN, with 19 years of experience in ICU, case management, and integrative wellness. Her issues began after Wi-Fi was introduced in her ICU workplace and nurses were required to wear wireless communication devices on their bodies (i.e., Vocera) throughout their shifts. At the same time, wireless exposures increased in our neighborhood and home. She began experiencing headaches, burning and ringing ears, head pressure, and a wired/ shaky sensation. Her previously mild, intermittent supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) worsened dramatically, and she developed non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT). She later developed mast cell activation syndrome. A day at a remote state park without cellular service or Wi-Fi brought striking relief from her symptoms. She repeatedly compared how she felt at the park, at work, and at home, and used an RF meter to assess environmental exposures. These experiences led her to realize that her symptoms and heart rhythm disturbances were associated with her exposure environments. Ultimately, she had to leave her in-hospital nursing career to protect her health. Watching my mother endure these challenges and give up work she was trained and dedicated to doing has been deeply concerning. Our family had to make enormous financial sacrifices to find a place where she felt better. We purchased land and downsized to a small, older home near the state park, where we could reduce exposures and obtain an electric utility arrangement permitting smart-meter opt-out. Even with these sacrifices, our experience has shown how difficult it can be to find alternatives. Many families simply cannot afford to leave their homes, change jobs, or relocate. No family should have to make these choices to protect a loved one’s health. No one should have to choose between earning a living, attending school, receiving medical care, and seeking an environment in which they feel safe. I urge HHS and lawmakers to take the following actions: Investigate potential health effects. Support rigorous, independent research into non-thermal effects of RFR and extremely low-frequency electric and magnetic fields, including possible cardiac, neurological, oxidative stress, mast-cell-related, and metabolic effects such as insulin resistance. Reassess exposure standards. Review current safety limits in light of the full scientific literature, including research on biological effects beyond tissue heating, cumulative exposures, long-term effects, and vulnerable populations. Protect people in essential environments. Evaluate wireless exposures in hospitals, schools, workplaces, and residential neighborhoods. Where feasible, provide lower-exposure spaces and practical alternatives for people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity. Protect informed choice. Support reasonable smart-meter opt-out provisions and alternatives to unnecessary wireless technologies, without imposing undue financial penalties or denying essential services. Listen to scientists and affected families. Invite independent researchers, medical professionals, and people reporting symptoms to testify. Review the BioInitiative Report (https://bioinitiative.org/) and consider inviting its contributing researchers and Andrew Marino, MD, PhD, to discuss research concerning RFR and electric and magnetic fields. As a daughter, I worry not only about my mother's health but also about what these questions could mean for children and future generations. Wireless technology is increasingly present in schools, hospitals, homes, and public spaces. We need responsible investigation and evidence-based safeguards rather than assuming that existing standards address every possible risk. I recognize that my mother's experience alone cannot establish scientific causation. However, her experience deserves serious consideration alongside the broader scientific literature. People experiencing these symptoms deserve compassion, appropriate medical evaluation, and research that neither dismisses their concerns nor presumes conclusions before the evidence is assessed. Please use your authority to ensure HHS investigates these concerns thoroughly, supports independent research, and develops policies that protect public health without placing the burden of exposure avoidance on individuals and families who are already struggling. Thank you for your attention to this important public health concern.

Subject: Letter of Concern for the HHS Hearing on EMF Dangers and Electromagnetic Sensitivity Dear Members of Congress and HHS Officials, I am writing as a concerned husband and citizen whose wife has endured profound health challenges from electromagnetic field (EMF) and radiofrequency radiation (RFR) exposure. I urge you to investigate potential health effects and take seriously the experiences of people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity. My wife is an RN, BSN, with 19 years of experience in ICU, case management, and integrative wellness. After Wi-Fi was introduced in her ICU workplace, nurses were required to wear body-mounted wireless communication devices, and wireless exposures increased in our neighborhood and home. She developed headaches, burning and ringing ears, head pressure, and a wired/shaky sensation. Her previously mild, intermittent supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) worsened dramatically, and she developed non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT). A day at a remote state park without cellular service or Wi-Fi brought striking relief. She repeatedly compared her symptoms at the park, work, and home and used an RF meter to assess exposures. These experiences led us to realize that her symptoms and heart rhythm disturbances were associated with her exposure environments. She subsequently developed mast cell activation syndrome and had to leave her in-hospital nursing career to protect her health. Our family made enormous sacrifices to find a place where she felt better. We purchased land and downsized to a small, older home near the park, where we could reduce exposures and obtain an electric utility arrangement permitting smart-meter opt-out. This was financially difficult. Many Americans cannot afford to leave their jobs, relocate, or purchase lower-exposure homes. No American should have to choose between earning a living and protecting their health, or between accessing essential services and reducing exposures they believe are making them ill. I urge HHS and lawmakers to take these actions: Investigate health effects. Fund rigorous, independent research into potential non-thermal effects of RFR and extremely low-frequency electric and magnetic fields, including cardiac rhythm disturbances, neurological symptoms, oxidative stress, mast-cell-related conditions, and metabolic effects such as insulin resistance. Reassess safety standards. Review current exposure limits against the full scientific literature, including evidence concerning biological effects beyond tissue heating. Consider human physiology, vulnerable populations, cumulative exposures, and long-term effects. Protect people in essential environments. Evaluate wireless exposures in hospitals, schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods. Where feasible, provide lower-exposure spaces and practical alternatives for people reporting electromagnetic sensitivity without forcing them to sacrifice employment, education, or medical care. Protect informed choice. Support reasonable smart-meter opt-out provisions and alternatives to unnecessary wireless technologies where technically feasible, without undue financial penalties or loss of essential services. Hear researchers and affected individuals. Invite independent scientists, medical professionals, and people reporting symptoms to testify. Review the BioInitiative Report (https://bioinitiative.org/) and consider inviting its contributing researchers and Andrew Marino, MD, PhD, to discuss the evidence concerning RFR and electric and magnetic fields. Please approach this issue as you would any potential environmental health hazard: examine the evidence, investigate credible warning signs, protect the public while uncertainties are addressed, and revise policies when warranted. My wife's experience has changed our family's life. I recognize that her experience alone cannot establish scientific causation, but it deserves serious consideration alongside the broader scientific literature. People reporting these symptoms deserve compassion, appropriate medical evaluation, and research that neither dismisses their concerns nor assumes conclusions before the evidence is assessed. Please ensure HHS thoroughly investigates these concerns, supports independent research, and develops evidence-based policies that protect Americans without placing the burden of exposure avoidance solely on affected individuals and their families. Thank you for your attention and service to the American people. Respectfully, A Concerned Husband and Citizen

I am responding from the perspective of an RN, BSN, who has 19 years of experience in ICU, case management, and integrative wellness; a sufferer of electromagnetic sensitivity; and a concerned mother. I developed electromagnetic sensitivity after WiFi was added to the ICU I worked, body worn Vocera devices started being mandated for nurses to wear on their chests all shift long, and I unknowingly moved into a home with a smart meter attached in a neighborhood where multiple neighbors' new WiFis, smart meters, cell phones, new DECT cordless phones, and new DECT baby monitors had fields extending into my living and sleeping spaces. Ongoing exposure to this more intense RFR exposure caused me to have headaches, ringing and burning in my ears, a sort of wired/shaky feeling, pressure in my head, red ears (so a histamine response from mast cells), and later a dramatic worsening of episodes of the SVT arrhythmia I had since age 3, which had been very mild and sporadic prior to me being exposed to constant radiofrequency from multiple sources at home and at work. After a few months of the new exposures, I developed a new heart arrhythmia: NS V-TACH. Like the SVT, it was more symptomatic at work, but I didn't know why at first. Work had WiFi, my home did not. A day long trip to a state park, where there was no cell service and no WiFi is what suggested to me that it was my workplace, and, to a lesser degree, my neighborhood, that were setting off my heart arrhythmias and causing the other symptoms. At the state park in the middle of nowhere and essentially free of man-made EMF, all of the symptoms went away. I repeated the experiment many times, between the state park, work, and my home, to be sure. I bought an expensive RFR meter that helped me confirm that the places my heart behaved were lower RFR places. I found publications by Martin Pall, PhD, that helped explain why this was happening to my heart. RFR causes massive calcium efflux--so it does the opposite of what the calcium channel blockers medicine prescribes to help control arrhythmias do to the heart. I also went from just red ears to developing full blown mast cell activation syndrome. The medical literature shows that man-made RFR, as well as man-made electric and magnetic fields, can cause mast cells to migrate to places in the body they would not normally be found. I ended up having to leave my job over all of this to protect my own health. I also had to purchase land and a home near the state park where I felt better and where the rural electrical cooperative service provider allowed smart meter opt-out. Opt-out is not legally protected in my state, as it is in some others. Not everyone can afford to do what I did though. My family could barely afford to do it. To afford a home and land near the state park we had to down-size tremendously to a tiny 1980s house. It should not be the case that only folks with the money to do so can escape the health destruction from the barrage of man-made EMF modern society has made the norm for public spaces, hospitals, and neighborhoods. Additionally, as a healthcare professional, the fact that WiFi is used to induce insulin resistance in lab rats worries me. As HHS should know, insulin resistance eventually turning into type 2 diabetes in American's as young as elementary school aged is at full-blown crisis proportions today. Insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes of course create a huge cancer and dementia burden. My clients who work and live bathed in WiFi do indeed have worse labs around insulin resistance than my clients who try to avoid exposure at home and work. Americans should not be forced to be in schools, workplaces, or hospitals where they are being made insulin resistant, their mast cells are being affected, or those with heart arrythmia susceptibilities are having symptoms triggered. The same undesirable mechanisms that hurt those of us with heart arrhythmias when we are bombarded with RFR are also at play in other humans (i.e., calcium efflux and increased oxidative stress), they just don't have an early warning system like those of us with heart arrhythmias do. I feel that HHS should be aware of this and protecting Americans. I have attached some selected publications. There are many more HHS needs to seek out and read. RFR in America needs legislated safety limits based on the non-thermal effects of RFR on human physiology well established in research, not just around the thermal/heating effects (which is currently the case). Similarly, ELF magnetic and electric fields need to be assessed and exposures controlled for human safety. The Bioinitiative Report is a great place for HHS to start. https://bioinitiative.org/ Authors of the Bioinitiative Report should be brought in to testify. These fine and educated folks have been sounding the alarm for years. Andrew Marino, MD, PhD, needs to be asked to testify around electric and magnetic fields.

My personal experience of Negative effects of EMFs. I was exposed to high levels of microwave radiation 2015 to 2019: -Lived in home with IOT devices throughout home emitting wireless radiation. >Also had DEC phones, including one next to my bed, emitting powerful radiation 24/7, incl. during sleep time. >I thought it fun to watch water boil while standing in front of a microwave oven. -As software developer, I worked around wireless including a router placed directly over my head at work. Symptoms started with "flu"; developed irritable bowel syndrome; and began experiencing low energy, like my life force was being drained away. Subsequently realized low energy due to degradation of red blood cells. Without a negative charge of membrance due to radiation disruption, cells clumped together and did not fit into small capillaries. Thus oxygen did not reach organs. I discovered the importance of bone marrow, and the consequences of not getting a supply of oxygen to create red and white blood cells (stem cells) -- blood was at low levels red blood cells. Low white cell count accounted for "flu" like symptoms. I began to experience double vision and dizziness along with "black outs" in awareness.

Public Comment on HHS Request for Information: EMF/RF Exposure and Human Health Docket No. HHS-OASH-2026-0397 I submit this comment as a concerned consumer urging the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to put public health, independent science, and informed consent ahead of commercial interests when evaluating radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF/EMF) exposure from wireless devices and infrastructure. Wireless technology is everywhere, from phones and Wi-Fi to wearables, smart meters, and cellular networks. Consumers cannot assess safety when exposure information is hard to find and testing may be funded by companies that profit from the products. The public deserves transparent answers. I do not claim every RF/EMF exposure causes illness or that every alleged harm is established. HHS should identify what is known and unknown, without treating uncertainty as proof of safety or speculation as proof of harm. Policy must follow transparent, reproducible science, free from commercial or advocacy pressure. I urge HHS to prioritize these actions: 1. INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY TESTING. Require qualified labs independent of manufacturers and telecom companies to test devices and infrastructure. Disclose funding, conflicts, methods, calibration, exposure conditions, analyses, and full results. Publish positive and negative findings and make testing reproducible. Industry-funded research must not be the sole basis for declaring a product safe. 2. REAL-WORLD AND CUMULATIVE EXPOSURE. Assess ordinary and high-use scenarios, multiple devices together, and long-term exposure in homes, workplaces, schools, childcare facilities, and neighborhoods. Consider distance, duration, frequency, signal strength, and actual use. Measurements must be independently verifiable and explained plainly. 3. LONG-TERM HEALTH RESEARCH. Fund adequately powered, independently replicated long-term human studies, systematic reviews, and laboratory research on reported concerns involving cancer, cognition, sleep, reproduction, development, cardiovascular outcomes, and other effects. Studies must distinguish correlation from causation, address confounding factors, publish protocols and null findings, and share data when ethical and privacy rules permit. 4. PROTECT VULNERABLE GROUPS. Assess whether added precautions are warranted for children, pregnant people, older adults, people with medical conditions, exposed workers, and users of medical devices. Include schools and childcare facilities. 5. CLEAR CONSUMER DISCLOSURES. Require accessible disclosures of emissions, limits, independent test results, test conditions, limitations, and uncertainty. Explain implications for normal and cumulative exposure. Create a searchable public database of test and adverse-event reports. Marketing must not substitute for evidence. 6. PUBLIC HEALTH MONITORING. Create privacy-protecting systems to report suspected health effects. Investigate credible patterns with validated exposure measurements and clinical assessment. Reports should prompt investigation, not prove causation automatically. Coordinate research and publish findings. 7. ACCOUNTABILITY WHEN HARM IS ESTABLISHED. If reliable evidence shows that a company's product, emissions, concealment, or failure to comply with safety requirements caused or materially contributed to injury, consumers should have meaningful remedies. Congress and regulators should consider requiring responsible companies to cover reasonable medical evaluation, treatment, ongoing care, and appropriate compensation. Companies that knowingly conceal credible safety findings, falsify results, or obstruct required disclosures should face meaningful penalties. Responsibility must be determined fairly, based on evidence, causation, and applicable law. 8. INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT. Disclose conflicts, publish the basis for conclusions, invite independent peer review, and explain how conflicting evidence is weighed. Review standards as technology and science evolve. Publish who funded studies, what was measured, and why conclusions were reached. Consumers deserve information about possible risks, and should not bear the full financial burden if evidence establishes preventable harm. Transparency encourages safer design, honest communication, and better science. I urge HHS to establish rigorous, independent, publicly accountable RF/EMF research and oversight. Where evidence identifies a risk, take proportionate action. Where evidence is uncertain, fund better research and communicate uncertainty honestly. Where evidence does not support an adverse effect, explain that conclusion and the strength and limits of the research. Commercial confidentiality should never hide information essential to public health. The public deserves independent testing, accessible data, protections for vulnerable populations, and medical and financial remedies when harm is demonstrated.

I am submitting this comment as an individual who has experienced severe and life-changing health problems that I associate with exposure to electromagnetic fields, particularly radiofrequency (RF) radiation from wireless devices. My sensitivity to wireless radiation began approximately four years ago. Gradually, I noticed that exposure to devices emitting wireless signals appeared to trigger or significantly worsen symptoms similar to those associated with fibromyalgia, including physical pain, exhaustion, and a profound reduction in my ability to function both physically and mentally. At the time, I was living in Paris and working in the IT industry, which meant that I was surrounded by wireless devices and exposed to multiple sources of RF radiation on a daily basis. Despite trying to reduce my exposure, I gradually became less and less able to cope with the demands of my professional life. I had to progressively reduce my working hours and responsibilities until I eventually reached a point where I could no longer work at all. Approximately two and a half years ago, I also had to leave Paris and move back in with my parents in the countryside in an attempt to improve my health, at age 30. Although my current living environment has significantly less wireless radiation than my previous one, exposure is far from absent, partly because there are mobile phone base stations in the village. My symptoms remain severe and have a devastating impact on my daily life. Whenever I have to leave the house or when other people use mobile phones inside the house, I experience a significant worsening of my symptoms. Conversely, I have noticed that spending time in quiet environments with very low levels of wireless radiation can bring some relief and allow me to recover a small degree of well-being. This observation has become one of the most important factors in my efforts to manage my condition. The consequences extend far beyond physical discomfort. I have lost my ability to work, I rarely see my friends anymore, and I am no longer able to participate in ordinary daily activities. Rather than truly living, I feel that I am merely surviving. This is particularly difficult because I desperately want to regain my health, return to work, become active again, and rebuild a reasonably normal life. Over the past four years, I have consulted dozens of doctors and healthcare practitioners, including practitioners working in alternative approaches. Unfortunately, none of the treatments I have tried has provided meaningful or lasting relief. So far, the most significant improvement I have experienced has come from being in quiet environments with very low levels of wireless radiation, and also having an healthy diet, cooking fresh and organic products helped me.

I did not consent, nor do I consent today, to the continuous, involuntary exposure to biologically active RF radiation. My injury from radio frequency radiation began in the 2010s when millimeter scanners were used for airport security. When I had to go through one, I would be bedridden the entire next day because my body couldn’t function from the radiation exposure. In 2016 when a router at work was installed on the outer wall above my desk, I was disabled with heart palpitations, headaches, dizziness, nausea, the top of my head felt as it the sun was burning the top of my brain and my body was overwhelmed with feeling as if a weighted blanket had been thrown over me. The router had to be removed. When cell towers were built, they harmed me with stabbing pain through my head and neck, palpitations, headache and dizziness. I would have to alter my driving route to avoid them. Since the 2020s when their numbers were significantly increased, they are impossible to avoid. I have the same harmful symptoms when driving past them. On July 8, 2024 when smart meters were installed in my neighborhood, the harm from the pulse-modulated RF radiation (the worst kind) was great. I suffered debilitating harm. I immediately was impacted by the pulsed radiation with off kilter balance, body heaviness, whole body weakness, stabbing pain in temples, head squeezing sensation, weak thighs and hips with great pain so it was difficult to walk, palpitations, chest heaviness, headache and nausea, blood from sinuses, interrupted sleep, extreme tiredness, difficulty concentrating, tinnitus and worsening of tremor disease. https://www.americansforresponsibletech.org/_files/ugd/2cea04_bc6229ea88e040d98aa9bf2eced35134.pdf My home is no longer my safe sanctuary. I have no wireless devices in my home. Everything is hardwired. I have a cell phone which I only turn on and check once or twice a day. My home is invaded by the constant exposure to the radio frequency radiation and pulse-modulated RF radiation from smart meters, cell towers and neighbor’s routers. I used to walk through the neighborhood a lot for exercise. Now it is too harming to me with all of the smart meter radiation to do so. I have turned off all wireless controls in my vehicle. Travel is difficult due to cell towers everywhere. They cannot be avoided when driving. Hotels and vacation rentals have RF radiation devices in them and there are cell towers on or near the buildings. Airplanes are filled with radiation and seatmates use RF producing devices during flights. There are even shelves on airplane seatbacks for the RF devices to rest on behind the heads of the person sitting in front of it to expose them to device radiation. There is no escaping the harm and injury of radio frequency radiation and pulse-modulated RF radiation. My physicians have no remedy for me. My sister is also affected in the same ways. This submission represents her as well. Those of us with EMR syndrome are the canaries in the mine shaft. We become immediately injured from exposure to the radiation. That does not mean there is no harm to everyone else. All are exposed to unsafe levels of radiation from all wireless devices. Everyone’s health is injured by it. My quality of life and health have been tremendously harmed by the constant exposure to the radio frequency radiation and pulse-modulated RF radiation. There are untold numbers of us who live in constant disability and pain from the radio frequency radiation and pulse-modulated RF radiation. There needs to be ADA accommodations for those of us with EMR Syndrome. The exposure levels need to be dramatically reduced and there needs to be radio frequency radiation and pulse-modulated RF radiation free areas of the country for us to live in. EMR Syndrome is the easiest disability to reverse and heal. As you work to protect the health of all Americans, please reverse this disabling situation. Please support safe technology that allows us to communicate without harm to anyone. It has also been my observation that in the past several years with more cell towers erected in the area and smart meters installed, there are fewer and fewer birds and bees. https://www.bemri.org/publications/wildlife-and-plants/wildlife/1-birds-bees-and-mankind/file https://www.americansforresponsibletech.org/_files/ugd/2cea04_63cd657e2ebc493dbc3cf4a92044f2ba.pdf Thank you for your help. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. October 15, 2026.