Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives

In 2017 I was injured by WiFi emanating from a replaced router/modem in early December 2016. My computer had always been intentionally wired. The technician turned on WIFI throughout the house and never mentioned it. Within four months I was feeling the weakening effects. By April I experienced flu like symptoms that never went away so I thought perhaps I had developed allergies.. By August I had become physically very handicapped and saw a chiropractor weekly so I could walk or turn my head. My hair had turned white and much had fallen out. I thought of killing myself as the irradiation process and disintegration was very painful, but due to senility which was also created, I could never remember my plans from the night before to end the misery. In mid-August I was invited to a friend's book signing on the history of electricity, The Invisible Rainbow. He read all the symptoms of electrical poisoning. I said to a friend sitting beside me, "I have all those symptoms". My friend said, "Well, you must have WiFi at your house." I replied in the negative and he insisted on seeing for himself. And yes, WiFi was everywhere till he turned it off. Obviously I am not computer literate. So yes, the WiFi was gone but not the symptoms. I was senile for about four more years. Parts of my body did not work well for several years. My hearing and eyesight are both, almost ten years later, very problematic. I had 20/20 eyesight prior to the WiFi. Digestive issues come and sometimes go, which had never been an issue before. I am allergic to cell phones; I have a landline whose receiver I cannot talk into but I use the speakerphone part. If I fly, I must wear special clothing and a head cover. Out in public if I get too much EMF exposure, I will have a bad cough the next day or even two if the exposure is too prolonged. My quality of life is definitely diminished. However I am very grateful that the cause of my ill health had been found before I died from the radiation. I am very concerned about the Smart Meter march forward as I know I will not have long to live if Smart Meters are required on every home. Please stop this from happening! Obviously I cannot be close to cell towers. Their proliferation is definitely cause for concern as the human race has not had time to mutate or adjust somehow to this influx of unhealthy EMF. People here have correlated proximity of cell towers to cancer outbreaks in that area of town, but the City Council professed not to be able to stop the spread of cell towers due to the FCC regulations and fines that would ensue if in opposition to cell tower erections. This is Unconstitutional and against each individual's right to life. I thank you so much for giving those afflicted a platform to espresso their concerns. If my immense suffering can save others from such an experience, I will feel I have not suffered in vain. Please help us all!

Al jarenlang ben ik stralingsgevoelig en wordt dus ziek van elektromagnetische straling. Thuis heb ik geen wifi, maar heb mijn laptop aan de kabel. Ik gebruik geen mobiele telefoon, maar get een stralingsarme vaste telefoon. Bankbetalingen doe ik altijd met een identifier en nu ze daarmee willen stoppen krijg ik grote problemen. Ook betalingen in winkels doe ik met mijn bankpas en niet met een mobiel. Wereldwijd zijn er tienduizenden onderzoeken die de schadelijke effecten op het menselijk lichaam hebben aangetoond. Dus waarom doet onze regering net of die onderzoeken niet bestaan? Bijna 15 jaar geleden had Zembla hier al reportages over gemaakt. Veel mensen hebben gezondheidsklachten, maar weten niet dat dat komt door hun mobiel of wifi. Waarom wordt dat geheim gehouden? De meeste mensen denken daarom dat EMS veilig is. Op Malta werden waarschuwingsfilmpjes op de nationale tv uitgezonden. Waarom niet hier? Is de telecomindustrie en geld belangrijker dan de gezondheid van de bevolking? Dus ik doe een beroep op het moreel besef van de mensen die hierover beslissen.

I am submitting this comment as a member of the public who is concerned not only about the scientific questions surrounding radiofrequency and electromagnetic field exposure, but also about the increasingly involuntary nature of that exposure. For many years, I made a deliberate personal choice to minimize unnecessary wireless radiation in my home. That choice became increasingly difficult to exercise as communications providers and other systems shifted away from wired infrastructure and toward wireless technologies. In my case, Cox Communications previously provided service over fiber-optic infrastructure extending directly to our home. That option was later discontinued, leaving wireless-based service as the practical alternative presented to us. I had avoided relying on that technology because of concerns about RF exposure, but eventually found myself in a position where accepting greater wireless exposure was effectively a condition of maintaining ordinary modern communications service. This raises a broader public-health concern that I hope HHS will consider carefully. When the long-term biological effects of a form of environmental exposure remain the subject of scientific investigation, individuals should not be placed in a position where meaningful avoidance is progressively designed out of everyday life. Yet wireless transmitters are now embedded not only in phones and routers, but throughout homes, vehicles, appliances, utility systems, schools, workplaces, public spaces, and communications infrastructure. For people who would prefer to exercise precaution, the practical ability to do so is disappearing. I am not asking HHS to presume a conclusion that the scientific evidence has not yet established. I am asking the Department to recognize the ethical and public-health significance of involuntary exposure itself. A population should not effectively become the subject of a decades-long, uncontrolled exposure experiment simply because wireless deployment has outpaced our ability to establish complete answers about cumulative, chronic, and multi-source exposure. Where reasonable lower-exposure alternatives exist, they should be preserved. In particular, I encourage HHS to consider recommending policies that protect access to wired communications, fiber-optic service, wired building systems, and other non-wireless alternatives. People who wish to reduce RF exposure should not have to abandon basic communications services in order to do so. I also encourage HHS to examine cumulative real-world exposure rather than treating each device or transmitter only in isolation. The relevant question for many members of the public is no longer simply whether one device complies with an exposure limit. It is what happens when many sources operate continuously in the same home, neighborhood, workplace, vehicle, and public environment over many years. Whatever conclusions HHS ultimately reaches about health risk, precaution and informed choice should remain legitimate options. Individuals should have a meaningful ability to reduce unnecessary exposure in their own homes and immediate environments, rather than having that choice gradually removed by technological and infrastructure decisions over which they have little control.

The more we learn about frequencies and how they affect our health, it becomes apparent that the frequencies of 5G and other WiFi frequencies and the waves emitted from LED lights and cell phone magnetism are disruptive to the human physiology. It has been proven through a study at U of Washington that magnetic fields disrupt the dna in the brains of mice and yet, we have been allowed to be burdened by the electronic devices which have become Omni present and almost unavoidable in order to maintain communication with our loved ones. The old copper phone lines were far better for the protection of the family and society as a whole. The suitor wanted to reach our children- they called, the phone rang in the kitchen, everyone knew who had called and the family was able to protect the child. Today all of the communications are on mobile devices and our children are able to be privately courted on the internet by strangers who seek to use them and exploit them. This must change.

Hello, Before I start, I want to say that I had my whole eardrum replaced in 87 as a doc flushed my ear out so hard, the whole side of my neck was killing me and had black stuff coming from ear and needed a new ear drum. Living on a farm in Gorham Maine yrs. ago, I was in our garden and someone was doing something on the 1 bedroom house I was renting and didn't think much of it till every 2 mins. I was getting stabbing sharp pain in my eardrum and didn't know why. My cat was looking around at nothing going on. This went on for a while till I found out the landlord allowed a smart meter on house. When I learned about Analog, I had it removed and problem was solved. Now I live in a town called Westbrook Maine, the week I moved in, I had meter changed to Digital, they claim they can't get parts for Analog which is another lie. They can put Satellite's in space but no parts for meters. The Public is beyond sick of being lied too. I have a neighbor downstairs who keeps Wifi on 24/7 and a neighbor to the left of me doing the same. I have no Wifi in my Apt and everything is hard wired, yet I have been losing my hair since moving in. I can feel a sensation on my head, gentle pull on that area and hair comes out. I can feel it coming from light sockets on my skin and I went from 1 old Lenovo laptop which was ok but it didn't support windows 11 so I had to get a Lenovo Yoga and I feel the strength of EMF coming from screen. My neighbor is also losing hair but she doesn't want to hear it. I am only 66 yrs. old and this has been going on for 3 yrs. The biggest problem I find with Tech is they create something without being MADE TO make sure it is safe 1st. An example is Halogen car lights or even other car lights, or LED lights, did anyone EVER consult with eye experts to see if any of these lights were safe to public? My answer is no. They are allowed to create anything without knowing safety 1st. I worked for 2 manufacturing Incandescent light bulbs, both factories moved to Mexico in the 80's and 90's. From what I understand, the court ordered FCC or someone to test safety of EMF and they gave the finger to the courts and did nothing. I took Cosmetology at my Trade school so I know when the skin is effected, it's bound to effect the hair Follicles. I don't know what more I can do. Every time we save to move more into the Country, the muffler needs work at $1000 a wack. I am totally awake as to what has been going on my whole life as I was going to be 4 yrs. old the day after JFK was shot and I thought as a self centered child, I thought my mom couldn't afford a birthday gift for me as we were 4 kids and dad gone, but when I went to penny candy store, owner was sad too so I knew from a young age things weren't right. Now they talk about satellites beaming down, what does that do to humanity and nature? Can anyone ever tell the truth for once? It also does no good to Regenerate soil while our skies are sprayed daily and I had my rain water tested 15 yrs. ago. When does the insanity stop, I don't know but I pray daily. Until Humanity is more important than profits, it will continue. We need a reawakening, far to many asleep and God will not bless America if we don't get involved and change our ways. I want to also express my Gratitude for all the hard work this Administration is doing, American and the world is watching, God speed. I know I went a little off subject, so sorry, Thank you listening to my testimony. Blessing to all, Lisa

The present state of regulation address only short term thermal effects from RF radiation. Non-thermal and long term effects are not addressed. However when they occur they are actually short term. Symptoms may vary from potentially causing tumor, by different effects from braking DNA, over oxidative stress that cause many sorts of disturbances. Further is associated to EHS or electro hypersensitivity syndrome, such as headaches, memory loss, tinnitus, problems of concentration, sleeping disorder, anxiety, depression and the other variety of symptoms. The last but not least is the impact on fertility. Studies on moused have indicated strong correlation. My personal opinion is when located in the large city on strong infrastructure, ther use to be tinnitus, when going to the small place on the seaside with lower exposure levels, tinnitus release significantly. The present sate of limits is to ICNIRP up to 10 W/m2 power flux for the general population. However that level is the limit for thermal effects, the non thermal appear at much lower levels in extended time of exposure, such as commonly considered levels over 10 microW/m2. That it difference in exposure of million times under official limits or 60 dB. Recommended levels by independet science are even lower and are considered additionally 100 times or 20dB lower. That may be close to levels that existed before massive base stations deployment, when only TV transmitters were available. Still todays exposure levels to limits are 100 million billions times higher then the natural radio frequency background levels or up 170 dB higher as to some research. That does not match the evolutionary adaptation. The main problem are mobile phone base stations as they present non-stop exposure and they are not a matter of personal choice. On the other hand mobile phones, WI-FI or DECT phones can present some higher levels of exposure on short distance, but they are the matter of personal choice and time of exposure could be chosen on functional preference. As to deployment of wi-fi for schools it is important to note that they cause in vicinity the same radiation as base stations on about 50 meters distance. Many studies on base stations like those done in Minas Gerais Brazil, in the Naila Germany that effects are most dominant in distances up to 500 meters and they even indicated correlation of symptoms by the distance. So the question is how could modern technology like those radiation emitters improve the quality of life if it cause insomnia, tinnitus, depression, sleeping disturbance or any other more severe diseases? If only the infertility rates are increase it can endanger national security as to the possible loss of domestic population. The solution to the problem is to use landlines and cable internet, as all functions can be done, even better, as optical internet is much safer and more reliable then wireless also the classic cable phone instead of mobile or DECT as it completely solves the functional need at any stationary location. Wireless communication makes sense only for airplanes, ships and satellites as the only option. In the car mobile phones are not allowed for use. The other question is where is such emergency that the average person should be in access at any moment? The average person is not ambulance, fireman or police for a need to instant access. Additionally constant exposure to information and access is related to significant stress and reduction in mental health, besides the radiation. As the degraded health can no more be purchased for money, the trade of health for money by the use of radiation exposure devices is not a good deal. They are prone to cause addiction, stress, loss of personal communication, physical and mental health degradation, there is no justification for its use, as all the rational jobs can be done on desktop computers, classic phone and landline internet, without radiation exposure. Costs of health in long term can significantly increase and the trick used by agencies is there is no evidence for side effects in the short term as from those protect the regulation. Actually the regulation protects industry from law suites rather then people from the radiation effects. In the attachement the excellent and wide coverage study from the Austrian health department and Austrian medical chamber, by Dr. Oberfeld, the great exert on environment and independent radiation research. In hope for better public education on risks from radiation exposure and removal of radiation exposure sources. Kind regards, Robert Markusic, ing.med.radiology & mag.oec.

Comment on HHS-OASH-2026-0397, Request for Information on EMFs, RF Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure Respondent: Sam Galiatsatos, Austin, Texas Perspective (Q2): Individual consumer and family member Questions addressed: 2, 5(n), 5(p), 9, 13(a), 13(d), 15(a)-(d), 16, 17, 18 Summary: HHS should treat network architecture as a way to reduce unnecessary exposure, and should favor a satellite-to-gateway-to-fiber build in federal health and broadband policy. How a network is built decides how many transmitters sit near homes, schools and clinics. The recommended build has four layers: 1. Low Earth orbit satellites reach places fiber cannot reach at reasonable cost. 2. Gateway ground stations, a few fenced sites, hand satellite traffic straight to fiber. 3. Fiber trunks carry that traffic into cities and rural hubs. Fiber carries light and emits no RF. 4. Inside homes, schools and clinics, people get wired connections and low-power Wi-Fi they can switch off. Q13 and Q15: Short-range 5G bands need more sites mounted close to streets and homes, so neighborhood exposure depends on site count and distance. With satellite broadband, the serving transmitter is in orbit, and home terminals and gateways aim their main beams at the sky. HHS should classify satellite direct-to-cell service separately, since the phone itself is the transmitter near the body. Exposure evidence should record distance to homes, schools and clinics, cumulative neighborhood exposure, and transmitters per square kilometer. Q5(n) and 5(p): Report transmitter density and backhaul type alongside device limits. Coordinate with NTIA and the FCC so broadband funding counts lower neighborhood transmitter density as a public health benefit. Add beam direction, site density and service role (everyday versus backup) to any classification system. Q9: Publish transmitter site maps for residents and local governments, notify schools and childcare facilities of nearby installations, and tell subscribers how their service reaches the home. Q16 and Q17: Start with measurement. Compare real-world exposure in neighborhoods served by dense small cells, fiber to the home, and rural satellite. FDA, NIH and CDC should coordinate with the FCC and NTIA on joint exposure mapping. Q18: Under the revised BEAD program, about two-thirds of funded locations will get fiber, so this build matches where federal dollars already go. ARPA-H's STACK program aims to bring clinical trials to rural patients, and those clinics need stable fiber connections. Limits: This comment does not claim that exposure below current federal limits causes harm. It recommends reducing exposure the network does not need while HHS reviews the evidence. The attached PDF contains the full comment, an illustrated diagram of the four layers, and linked sources for every figure cited.

The seriousness of this can be summed up easily and we need to put a stop the massive infrastructure being built asap. Health>Money “The brain is an electromagnetic. A cell tower is an electromagnetic transmitter operating at a frequency, modulation, and duty cycle the brain does not produce. Exposure from a tower is continuous and involuntary. A limit written only to prevent heating does not answer whether that field alters the electrical activity the brain depends on.” This comment is against cell towers, base stations, and small cells. The exposure they produce is involuntary, continuous, and aimed at homes, schools, and workplaces. A person can put a phone down. No one can opt out of a tower. Human beings are electrical. Nerve conduction, cardiac rhythm, and the voltage across cell membranes are measurable processes. A tower is an electromagnetic transmitter running all day, at a frequency and modulation the body does not produce. Federal limits address heating only. The tower studies looked past heating and found tumors. The study built as a base-station experiment is Falcioni et al., Environmental Research (2018), from the Ramazzini Institute. It exposed 2,448 rats from before birth until natural death to a 1.8 GHz GSM far-field signal at 5, 25, and 50 V/m, 19 hours a day, meant to resemble an antenna rather than a handset against the head. Male rats at 50 V/m had a statistically significant increase in malignant heart schwannomas. Schwann-cell hyperplasia rose in both sexes at that dose. The estimated whole-body absorption at 50 V/m was about 0.1 W/kg, far under the 1.6 W/kg phone limit, and the field strength sits under the FCC public limit of 10 W/m² in that band. The cancers appeared at exposures the current rules allow. The National Toxicology Program’s 2018 reports found the same tumor under near-field, phone-like modulation: clear evidence of malignant heart schwannomas in male rats, and some evidence of brain gliomas, plus DNA damage in brain tissue. Two designs, near-field and far-field, produced the same heart tumor. Mevissen et al., the World Health Organization systematic review of the animal cancer studies (Environment International, 2025), rated the evidence high certainty for an increase in heart schwannomas in male rats and high certainty for an increase in glioma. Those are the tumors the International Agency for Research on Cancer cited in 2011 when it classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as Group 2B, possibly carcinogenic to humans, on limited evidence of glioma and acoustic neuroma. Acoustic neuroma is a schwannoma of the vestibulocochlear nerve. People living near antennas show the same direction of effect, in smaller studies. Eger et al. (2004), in Naila, Germany, found new cancer cases about 3.4 times higher within 400 meters of a base station in the five years after it began operating, and patients diagnosed about 8.5 years younger. Wolf and Wolf (2004), in Netanya, Israel, reported cancer incidence about 4 times higher within 350 meters. Dode et al. (2011), in Belo Horizonte, found cancer mortality about 1.35 times higher within 100 meters of a base station, falling with distance. Balmori’s 2022 review of 38 studies of people living near base stations reported effects in 28 of them, including radiofrequency sickness, cancer, and biochemical changes. These are not large prospective cohorts. They are the human record that exists for towers, and it does not show safety. In 2021 the D.C. Circuit remanded the FCC’s decision to keep its 1996 limits (Environmental Health Trust v. FCC). The court held that the agency had not explained effects other than cancer, effects on children, long-term exposure, the spread of transmitters since the limits were written, or the environment. Towers are the environmental exposure. Children in schools and homes nearest the antennas have no say in it, and they will carry it for decades. HHS should tell the FCC, state health departments, and local governments the following. No new tower, macro site, or small cell, school, childcare center, or playground. Existing sites inside that distance should be disclosed, measured at the property line and in the nearest classrooms, and removed or powered down where a wired alternative exists. Cumulative exposure from every antenna on a structure counts, not one site at a time. Backhaul and school networks should be wired. Thermal compliance is not a health finding. The far-field experiment already produced the tumor at a level the rules permit. Refrences attached

It is foolhardy and dangerous to continue to deploy and expand technologies that emit EMFs when we know it is one of many toxic exposures contributing to our society's surge in chronic illnesses. We need to start making decisions on the basis of societal and individual health and longevity, not short term conveniences and money. We should devote money into alternative, safer, lower-emitting technology. We should mandate that the infrastructure be set away from neighborhoods, schools, and places where people and animals congregate. We should encourage wired connections when possible. We should devote resource to informational campaigns that help people understand the health impacts and minimize exposure.

I've noticed a discernible difference by removing our Wifi router / back to wired / ethernet. Besides removing the wifi completely when using a cell phone, placing it down on a table / holding it away from the body / head, makes a difference. And wearing silver lined clothing (havnwear) which acts as a faraday cage to mitigate.