Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives

Subject: Public Comment on RF/EMF Exposure and the Need for Stronger Public Health Protections Docket: HHS-OASH-2026-0397 I am submitting this comment as a concerned American citizen who believes our government must protect human health, future generations, and the environment from potentially harmful electromagnetic and radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure. I am deeply concerned about the expansion of cell towers, 5G infrastructure, wireless transmitters, and smart meters that contribute to continuous, involuntary RF exposure. Americans should not be subjected to increasing environmental exposure without rigorous, independent evidence establishing long-term safety. 1. Scientific Evidence of Potential Harm Substantial published research identifies potential biological effects associated with RF radiation. National Toxicology Program (2018): This major U.S. government investigation reported clear evidence of carcinogenic activity involving malignant heart schwannomas in male rats exposed to certain cell phone RF signals. Researchers also identified other tumor findings. https://doi.org/10.22427/NTP-TR-595 Ramazzini Institute (2018): This independent study investigated long-term RF exposure representative of cell tower emissions and reported increased heart schwannomas among male rats at the highest exposure level. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.037 Hardell and Carlberg (2015): Researchers reported associations between prolonged wireless phone use and increased glioma risk, particularly with longer latency periods. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25466607/ These findings warrant further independent investigation rather than dismissal. 2. Outdated Safety Standards Federal RF exposure standards have not adequately kept pace with modern wireless technology or continuous exposure from multiple overlapping sources. Safety assessments must address cumulative exposure, long-term biological effects, and potential nonthermal effects. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals found that the FCC had failed to adequately explain its treatment of evidence concerning non-cancer effects, children, long-term exposure, and environmental impacts. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/20-1025/20-1025-2021-08-13.html 3. Stronger Restrictions on Wireless Infrastructure I urge federal officials to substantially strengthen restrictions on cell tower placement, density, and emissions, particularly near homes, schools, hospitals, and agricultural land. I specifically request: 1. Independent reassessment of federal RF exposure limits using current research and cumulative exposure measurements. 2. Stricter tower-siting and emission standards near residential communities and sensitive locations. 3. Independent RF monitoring with publicly accessible results. 4. Long-term research concerning children, pregnant women, and vulnerable populations. 5. Investment in wired telecommunications and lower-emission alternatives. 6. Greater community involvement in tower placement decisions. 7. Investigation of potential effects on livestock, wildlife, pollinators, and ecosystems. 4. Industry Accountability and Independent Research Research establishing public safety standards must be transparent, reproducible, and free from undue commercial influence. I request disclosure of industry funding, conflicts of interest, unpublished findings, and underlying research data used in federal safety assessments. Studies identifying potential biological harm deserve serious evaluation regardless of commercial interests. 5. Public Health Must Come First Technological convenience and economic development should not automatically outweigh legitimate public health concerns. I support substantial reductions in unnecessary RF exposure, stricter wireless infrastructure limits, independent testing, and a precautionary approach wherever important safety questions remain unresolved. The American public deserves transparency, meaningful choices concerning involuntary exposure, and safety standards based on comprehensive scientific evidence rather than assumptions. I urge HHS to fully evaluate the research and establish stronger protections for human health, future generations, animals, and the environment. Thank you for considering my comment.

Before installation of 4G cell towers in the Netherlands I was not sensitive to wireless electromagnetic radiation, apart from continuous hearing of a high frequency sound. This changed when a cell tower was installed at 300 m distance of our house. We defended our house with black paint,curtains with iron thread, aluminum foil and fine-mesh iron fencing, disconnecting wifi, and using only cable connections. These measures helped for being safely at home for a while. In 2024 when 5G was installed I unfortunately became extremely sensitive for this radiation by cell towers, wifi, blue-tooth and mobile phones. I had to leave our church with a cell tower at a distance of 50 m. With my broadband RF meter "Safe and Sound Pro II" I discovered that too much radiation now entered our house despite our protection measures. The density of cell towers in Holland is so high that there are few places with low radiation and we could not find another affordable house at a safe place. We had no other option than to move to another country. In Hungary we found a small village where the radiation is almost zero in one of the streets where we bought a house to live in since last November. But health problems are not over yet. When going to other places here for shopping etc. I must have my cap and belt around my neck with silver thread on in order to protect myself, but even then I suffer often from nasty symptoms. The radiation is also tricky in that I usually don't experience its effects immediately and that the first symptoms are mild. When I have been in an environment with high radiation for a longer time, more heavy symptoms may continue afterwards for the rest of the day and sometimes even the next day, like continuous head pressure, headache, dizziness, fatigue, sleepiness, oppression on my throat, etc. A complete list of symptoms that I experienced since 4G was installed, I have added as a supporting document. The 27 symptoms are more than half of the about 40 known symptoms due to wireless radiation. Most people are already so addicted to their mobile phone, that it is nearly impossible to avoid the radiation when meeting others. Of course I do not and can not use a mobile phone, but my wife has one for necessary things. When she is using her phone, I had to go to another room in order not to become sick (she now works with a cable connection with her mobile phone). It is awful and completely unnecessary that mobile phones are obligatory for more and more activities, especially public authorities. I find it really criminal that the level of wireless radiation has been raised so high in the Western world. It is completely unnecessary, for wireless telecom is working also very well at much lower levels and with less frequencies. In Russia and China they use now levels that are about 100 times less than in de West. It is well-known that high levels of wireless radiation may kill people and can be used as a bio-weapon. Not only humans, also all living creatures suffer from this radiation. There is enormous scientific evidence that many insect species (like bees), but also many other animals become extinct in areas with a lot of radiation, especially in the neighborhood of cell towers and radar. Also plants are suffering and dying, for instance by smart electricity meters. The warming up of the atmosphere partly will be due to all the energy that is pumped in the air by wireless radiation. Wireless electromagnetic radiation is in fact completely unnecessary and should be stopped completely in order to restore the life conditions on our planet. The existing national and international exposure standards and guidelines, for instance from ICNIRP and FCC are outdated. ICNIRP is an organization with members of the telecom industry or connected with it. It is not an independent organization and its members are not democratically chosen. They neglect and deny all effects that are not thermal. The height of radiation that they think is safe, is much too high and is not based on sound scientific research. The publications on which they base their conclusions are corrupt and are funded by telecom and government organizations which are prejudiced and biased. P.S. Insects, other animals and plants abound in the area where we live now.

We are exposed to unacceptable levels of EMF short-wave pollution. People have experienced headaches, dizziness, inability to function, fatigue, heart issues, insomia,tumors, cancer and more. These cell towers with 5G and other toxic EMF exposures are sick. Even it you do not experience the above knowingly, you are still exposed and building health issues. Wildlife, which includes plants are also negatively affected. In other words, life itself is attacked by these EMF non-ionizing radiation. The concept that only heat generates injury was incorrect. There are safe ways to improve communication, such as fiber optics. In 1996 Pres. Clinton exempted the communication industry from health, safety and environmental issues connected to this industry. That non-regulation needs to be stopped. This industry is out-of-control. Cell towers are built near schools, which is an absolute travesty. We are entitled to a safe environment without rogue industries such as the above operating unregulated, immune to lawsuits for the health and environmental destruction they cause. I appreciate your concern for the public. Another issue involves geo-engineering. The public is now noticing the obvious spraying of chemicals and maybe more in the atmosphere. Whatever is sprayed is pulled down to the earth via gravity. A life on the planet is adversely harmed, and we are seeing the results. We are told the spraying is for ameliorating "climate change", which makes no sense. This spraying needs to be stopped. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

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 a thorough, independent review of whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. This review needs to consider those most heavily exposed and should examine potential effects beyond tissue heating, including evidence concerning cancer, reproductive health, and children’s development. 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. Please consider Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 analysis of animal data, which argues that existing exposure limits may inadequately protect against cancer and reproductive harm (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-026-01288-6). I also ask HHS to evaluate Lai and Levitt’s review of exposure intensity, duration, and signal modulation (https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2022.2065683), and Scarato’s review of US regulatory gaps and proposed reforms (https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1677583). These papers warrant careful consideration alongside the broader evidence, including studies that have not found adverse effects. I ask HHS to: •Assess whether additional protections are needed for children, pregnant women, and other potentially vulnerable groups. •Support long-term research with safeguards against industry conflicts of interest. •Provide clear information about exposure and practical ways to reduce it, including wired alternatives in homes and schools. •Recommend updated standards wherever the evidence shows that existing limits are insufficient. Consumers should not have to navigate these questions alone. Please use this inquiry to advance transparent science, meaningful oversight, and public health protection.

Hello, I am 50 y.o. EHS person, from Italy. I became Electro Hypersensitive around May 27th 2022. All of a sudden my laptop caused me nausea, fatigue and insomnia. Also Wi.Fi, mobile phone, cell sites, bluetooth devices, electric motors...started giving me these main symptoms in a range of time from a few seconds to two hours, depending on the amount of the electromagnetic field and/or radio frequencies. I bought several meters, especially the Safe&Sound Pro II for the radio frequencies. I feel good and I do not need any shielding clothes up to 3 microWatt per square meter. Up to 1000 mW/m2 I can resist a couple of hours if I am pretty shielded (overall suit, hat) At 3000 mW/m2 I resist a couple of hours only if I add the facial net, but it is challenging and I have to escape to a safe place, if there is. At 50.000 mW/m2 (when a cell site is on sight) I resist no more than 20 minutes with my shielding clothes. With a cell phone calling in my hands (3 million mW/m2 at contact level) I resist for a few seconds. So I can't take trains, buses, many airplanes, big ferry boats (due to the radar). The only way I can use a computer is to keep it beyond a wall and to use a video projector beyond a tin window with triple glass. Many houses are off limits (for WiFi and antennas) and most of the cars, too. I lost my career in film-making when I became EHS. Thank god I can teach in kindergartens and I live in one of the few healy houses left. Otherwise I would have to abandon my wife and my son and I would starve in the woods. EHS is not a nocebo effect at all. We always get the symptoms first, then we discover the cause. The solution is to use cable connections everywhere (for mobile phones, too), wherever electricity arrives, indoor and outdoor. Easy and safe. This is the future. Thanks for asking and for reading.

I submit these comments as an individual consumer and concerned family member (Q2). People cannot readily opt out of ambient exposure from nearby antennas. I urge federal agencies to reassess whether existing limits adequately address lifelong, real-world exposures, including for children and ecosystems. Q3–4: Sources of concern include cell towers/small cells, phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, smart meters, and wearables. People report headaches, sleep disruption, fatigue, and other symptoms they associate with RF exposure. Investigate these reports systematically without assuming causation. I report no personal diagnosis or clinical observations. Agencies should collect nonidentifying reports documenting device/source, measured exposure, timing, symptoms, medical evaluation, and changes after exposure reduction, using blinded tests where feasible. Q5–6: Compare FCC limits with ICNIRP 2020 and IEEE standards, WHO reviews, and IARC assessments. Explain how limits address frequency, SAR, power density, modulation, duty cycle, beamforming, distance, exposure duration, and multiple sources. The U.S. National Toxicology Program reported clear evidence of malignant heart schwannomas in male rats under specific high-level RF exposure conditions; these results do not establish risks from everyday 5G exposure. IARC classified RF fields as “possibly carcinogenic” (Group 2B) in 2011. Recent human reviews, however, found no increased risk for several studied cancers. Assess studies below limits and distinguish cellular changes from proven harm. Q7–9: Use calibrated broadband and frequency-selective meters, personal dosimeters, SAR testing, and validated modeling. Measure actual exposures across locations and times, including indoors, during peak traffic, and from multiple sources. Publish accessible antenna locations, operating characteristics, compliance methods, measured exposure ranges, uncertainties, and ways to request independent review. Q10–11: Build privacy-protective surveillance combining cancer registries, occupational and environmental monitoring, longitudinal cohorts, and voluntary adverse-event reports. Investigate clusters with comparison groups; reports are not proof. Biomarkers for individual RF dose are not established. Prioritize children, pregnant people, older adults, workers near transmitters, people with implanted medical devices (including interference risks), and people with preexisting conditions. Evaluate symptoms reported by people identifying as electromagnetically hypersensitive without presuming an RF cause. Q12–13: Investigate reproducible biological findings reported below some limits, while recognizing that a laboratory effect is not necessarily a health hazard. Compare exposure profiles—not merely the number of devices—for 5G, emerging 6G, Wi-Fi, satellites, IoT, wearables, smart homes/cities, autonomous vehicles, wireless medical devices, and smart meters. Exposure characteristics differ. Require updated assessments when technologies change. Q14–15: Fund rigorous studies of pollinators, birds, plants, and livestock, controlling for pesticides, habitat, climate, and other factors. An evidence map found hundreds of studies with quality limitations. Evaluate installations near homes, schools, childcare and healthcare facilities using site-specific measurements, cumulative neighborhood assessments, antenna characteristics, and realistic small-cell operation. Q16–17: NIH should fund independent, preregistered long-term epidemiology, developmental research, animal replication, and mechanistic studies. FDA should evaluate consumer and medical devices; CDC should coordinate surveillance and risk communication. FCC and health agencies should publicly explain how new evidence informs exposure standards and disclose conflicts of interest. Q18: I request (1) a time-bound, public reassessment of RF limits and their treatment of long-term, multi-source exposure; (2) publicly accessible environmental monitoring; (3) special review and community consultation for installations near schools and homes; (4) funding for ecological and human studies independent of industry; (5) practical wired options and clear device settings for consumers; and (6) a transparent process to report concerns and challenge incomplete compliance assessments. The 2021 decision in Environmental Health Trust v. FCC required the FCC to better explain its treatment of certain health and environmental issues; it did not find that 5G causes disease. A rigorous, updated public accounting is necessary. Sources: NTP, Cell Phone Radio Frequency Radiation Studies (2018); IARC Monographs Vol. 102 (2013); ICNIRP RF Guidelines (2020); Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, 9 F.4th 893 (D.C. Cir. 2021); WHO-commissioned systematic review of RF exposure and cancer (Environment International, 2024).

Please do more research into the health effects of EMF. Our family had had to wire up our house with bo wifi, use faraday cages, and get rid of utility smart meters because it caused massive problems for me with dizziness and head pressure to the point I could not stand. I cannot fly because the massive amount of wifi trapped in the airplane acts like a faraday cage and makes my head feel like it is exploding. This is a REAL issue affecting way more people than you know. As it took me quite a while to figure out the connection and many people never know why they are feeling this way. As wifi towers proliferate the world becomes harder and harder for me to live in.

When the DECT 6.0 technology was used with cordless landline phones, I stopped using the cordless handset, and only used the corded base phone, because using a cordless handset made me feel headachy and the sensation was like pins and needles. I hoped that I could find a way to disable or at least "turn off" the constant seeking behavior which that technology uses, but it's not possible. So the only lower-EMF-type phone was a simple corded landline, without any DECT 6.0 technology and without any capability to add a cordless handset. Then came the cell phone technology, and the issues started again. I have to use an anti-radiation case on my phone to stop the pins and needles tingling sensation - almost a burning sensation - all over again. Cell phones use that same seeking behavior but on a ramped up scale, always searching for more powerful signals, and wifi cuts through the house whether we need it that powerful or not. WE DON'T. I have to cover my wifi router with a lesser EMF-taming screen shield, just so that I can use the internet. Years ago, this was not needed. With 4G, 5G and now 6G...what's to stop the train of radiation from quickly cooking us to death? I want to opt out of this health mess, but am unable to do so....because it is unlawfully a part of life now to which we must all subscribe. This is not life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Our greatest asset is our health, and technology that cooks us with EMFs has stripped that health asset. Nowhere is safe. We've got to stop this while we can.

Perspective: Individual consumer and person reporting potential adverse health effects. Questions addressed: 3, 13(k), 16, and 18. I am submitting this comment because I want HHS to hear from people like me who are experiencing serious health problems associated with wireless technology, electromagnetic fields, and electrical exposure. My symptoms exploded after I purchased my Florida home in April 2023 and spent a week there. I have experienced burning skin, sharp head pains, fatigue, insomnia, difficulty thinking clearly, heart palpitations, tingling, numbness, worsening tinnitus, and vibrations in my legs when the HVAC runs. The vibrations stop when the system shuts off. I cannot tolerate Wi-Fi or Bluetooth and dirty electricity. I have made costly changes to my home to reduce same, including replacing appliances, changing lighting and wiring, using wired Ethernet, and rerouting HVAC lines through the garage. I am still struggling. I use a Greenwave meter to measure electrical noise in my home. My readings fluctuate, with approximately 400 mV on the low end and readings as high as 1212. Around 50 mV is what I can tolerate. I want better research into electrical noise and its possible health effects. When I purchased my home, a smart meter was installed. The meter was changed in May 2023. I requested a true analog electromechanical meter, but Florida Power & Light provided a digital meter it describes as non-communicating. My concern is not limited to wireless transmission; it also involves the digital and electronic nature of the meter. I have repeatedly provided FPL with medical documentation requesting an analog electromechanical meter, as recommended by my doctors. I even purchased one that FPL could inspect and install, taking the cost of obtaining the meter off FPL. I formally submitted an ADA disability accommodation request supported by my medical documentation. However, FPL denied my request without acknowledging or addressing it as a disability accommodation, responding instead as though I had made an ordinary customer request. Despite more than 20 attempts to resolve this matter, FPL has refused to provide the analog meter my doctors recommended. I also continue to pay a monthly fee for the non-communicating digital meter and its manual reading. What is especially discouraging is even after seeking medical help and repeatedly providing written recommendations, I feel my health concerns have not been taken seriously. It is hard not to feel that companies care more about revenue and policies than the health of the people affected. People reporting serious health problems deserve to be heard and treated with respect. I have spent more than $15,000 having mercury dental fillings removed in an effort to address my symptoms, but the symptoms persisted. I am desperate to understand what is happening and find relief. My condition also affects my family and others who do not experience what I do. They must sometimes change their lifestyles when around me. It is painful to struggle with my health while knowing that my circumstances affect the people I care about. I am severely affected by what I believe are wireless exposures and electrical pollution, and I am frightened by the toll this is taking on my health and my life. I ask HHS to support independent, thorough research into the potential health effects of radiofrequency radiation, electromagnetic fields, wireless devices, digital electrical equipment, and electrical noise. Research should consider people reporting symptoms in circumstances that may not affect everyone equally, as well as combined exposures in everyday environments. People deserve clear information about what is known, what remains uncertain, and how exposures are assessed. Practical alternatives, such as traditional analog electromechanical meters where feasible, should also be considered for people reporting serious difficulties with digital and wireless technologies. More needs to be brought to light about what people like me are experiencing. There are people suffering from serious symptoms who feel that no one acknowledges what is happening to them. Instead of having their concerns taken seriously and properly investigated, they are often dismissed or made to feel as though they are crazy. I know what it is like to struggle with these symptoms while trying to get someone to listen. We deserve to be heard, and our experiences deserve honest, independent scientific investigation. People should not have to prove beyond all doubt what is causing their suffering before anyone is willing to take them seriously. This has cost me my health, money, comfort, peace of mind, and the ability to safely live in my home. I ask HHS to listen, investigate and support research that provides honest answers based on good science. We should not have to wait for absolute certainty before our experiences are taken seriously.

I am submitting these comments in two capacities: 1. As an individual: Based on my personal experience with Wi-Fi and my concerns regarding potential health effects associated with wireless radiation. 2. As a board member of The Civil Health Rights Movement May Day, Denmark: My comments also draw on a legal opinion obtained in 2019 concerning the deployment of 5G in Denmark. The legal opinion references numerous scientific studies. I have included its conclusion below and attached the full document for reference. 1) Individual consumer Question 3 Seven years ago, I spent approximately six hours a day working at my computer for about a week on a major project at my summer house. I had just received a new router (TP-Link) for my fiber net and was very happy that the whole set-up worked so well out in the middle of nowhere. I was writing on my computer and the Wi-Fi was on as I had to be in constant communication with several people all over the country, and I was well connected. Then after three days, I woke up with an overwhelming tinnitus and pressure headache. I wondered for a day why this had suddenly come and then I realized it was probably the radiation from the Wi-Fi. I managed to cut the Wi-Fi and get a cabled solution instead. After 4-5 hours in a Wi-Fi free environment and a walk by the beach, the tinnitus was gone and since then I have experienced the same on tests: 2-3 days in a Wi-Fi environment and the tinnitus and headache turns on. Now everything in my house is cabled. No medical doctor or medicine was involved. No measurements were done at the time. 2) Member of The Civil Health Rights Movement May Day, board member (Denmark) Question 12 and 18 I would like to draw attention to a legal opinion entitled LEGAL OPINION on Whether it would be in Contravention of Human Rights and Environmental Law to Establish the 5G System in Denmark obtained in 2019 by May Day and other stakeholders in Denmark. The opinion examines scientific studies relating to potential health and environmental effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, including exposure within the limits recommended by ICNIRP. The conclusion of the legal opinion is reproduced below. The full document is attached as supporting material. “It is the conclusion of this legal opinion that establishing and activating a 5G-network, as it is currently described, would be in contravention of current human and environmental laws enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, EU regulations, and the Bern- and Bonn-conventions. The reason is the very significant body of scientific documentation available, showing that radio frequent electromagnetic radiation is harmful and dangerous to the health of humans (particularly children), animals and plants. This also applies when the radiation remains within the limits recommended by ICNIRP and currently used in Denmark as well as broadly within the EU.” Charlotte, Denmark