Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives

Hello: We reside in Fort Lauderdale Florida. This is in regard to my own Electromagnetic Radiation Syndrome. Because I was unable to sleep for six months, we decided to disconnect the wifi at night. When we found that helpful we changed to ATT so now our home is completely hard wired. We had Florida Power and Light remove our Smart Meter. I purchased 2 gallons of EMF shielding paint for the bedroom, as we pick up the neighbor signals. I bought faraday cloth for the sliding glass door. I sewed a faraday cloth hoodie apron for when we travel and stay in hotels. Three years ago I discovered I also experience a strong vertigo when we shop Office Depot. It was also happening at church on Sundays so we had to change churches. The vertigo starts about 10 to 15 minutes of entering the building and takes just as long to stop when we depart. That is my story. It is a good thing I am retired because it would not be possible to work in a building when the vertigo is as strong as it has been.

To: OASH HHS Re: HHS-OASH-2026-0397-0001 Here are personal observations in regard to EMF, RF and high frequency signals in general. Like most responsible health concious beings we all are concerned with the adverse effects from such man made technology. This has been and continues to be well documented by science & technology. These are experienced by most everyone in developed urban areas or near such devices and infrastructures without full knowledge or consent. In 2020 I tele-visited with an Ayurvedic Practioner in the SVA lineage of Vaidya Rama Kant Mishra's family. These were master vaidya's serving Lord Krishna's family. When Vaidya Mishra arrived in the US from India he noticed a commonality in patient's pulses not seen in India. Their livers were hot and angry from over processed foods, pharmaceuticals and synthetic supplements. He also noticed 'lightening' in the pulse which he traced to EMF, RF exposure. The pracitioner who visited with me was told by Vaidya Mishra that she could help the sensitive ones. Her husband was an electrical and computer science engineer interested in indoor environment safety. He provided a complimentary consult with some tips for reducing my exposure. Use ethernet and turn off the wifi, turn off the smartphones when on person and do not hold them near the head or set any devices on the lap and several other useful tips to lessen risk. When wifi was switched off at the source and not broadcasting 2.4 or 5 ghz frequencies, I noticed a lessening of 'hotness' and general agitation during and after use. There are several studies measuring the effects of exposure on human tissues. My first knowledge of these reports were via the library of Blushield technology. Blushield is now in my small home and in my backpack wherever I go in urban areas. It is a personal preference for mitigating exposure. It is also in loved ones homes. As a grandparent endeavoring to protect the precious resorce that is our children, I am deeply concerned with how we inform and handle this in the modern world.

I'm writing to share how wireless radiation has affected my health and to raise a concern I don't think current policy accounts for: the layering of exposure inside and around our homes and office buildings. For years I lived with migraines, tinnitus, poor sleep, slow recovery, and a nervous system that struggles to settle. These aren't abstract complaints; they shape my life. When I began measuring the radio frequency levels in my home and reducing them, by hardwiring our network, scheduling the router off at night, and tracking down hidden sources, my body responded. The quality of my sleep has improved, although I still have day to day exposure and migraines have gotten worse, and the ringing in my ears hasn't stopped. What's most concerning is how pervasive the exposure is getting. A decade ago, a home might have had one wireless router. Today, radios are built into refrigerators, washers, thermostats, smoke detectors, televisions, sound systems, garage door openers, lighting controls, doorbells, and security systems, alongside routers, modems, and mesh repeaters. Many are boxed into walls and cabinets where homeowners can't see them, and many can't be turned off without disabling the appliance itself. People and pets absorb these signals around the clock, including while we sleep, when the body is meant to repair. Even after we deployed mitigation strategies, the highest reading in our house was in the hallway outside our bedroom, and it traced back to an alarm communicator mounted inside a closet wall. We didn't choose that exposure; we didn't even know it was there.The layers don't stop at our walls. Outside, 5G small cells now sit on streetlights and utility poles steps from bedroom windows, in addition to existing cell towers. Smart meters on each home relay signals to one another in a mesh network, so an entire neighborhood transmits as one connected system. License plate cameras at intersections and community entrances send their data over cellular connections, and satellite networks now beam service down from above. I can turn off my own router at night; I can't turn off my neighbor's smart meter, the small cell on the corner, or the camera at the end of my street. The public never consented to any of this and an informed public would surely not consent. Many of these systems also track where we go; geofencing lets companies and agencies draw a virtual boundary and collect data from every phone that crosses it. We weren't asked about the exposure or the tracking. Federal exposure limits were set in 1996 and evaluate single devices, not the cumulative load of dozens operating at once. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found the FCC had failed to explain why those limits still protect people from harms unrelated to cancer, including effects on children and long-term exposure. The U.S. National Toxicology Program and Italy's Ramazzini Institute both found tumors in rats exposed to cell phone and cell tower radiation, and a Danish birth cohort study linked prenatal and childhood phone exposure to behavioral difficulties. Over the same decades that wireless exposure has multiplied, we've seen rising rates of autism, autoimmune disease, and chronic illness, and some researchers have raised questions about RF exposure and mold growth indoors. I'm not suggesting wireless radiation is the single cause of any of these; I'm asking that it be studied seriously rather than ruled out. Wireless radiation also doesn't reach us alone. Every day we're exposed to more synthetic building materials that off-gas, plastics in our clothing, children's toys, and household products, and chemicals permitted in our food and skincare. Each of these is approved on its own, and RF limits are set one device at a time, while our bodies take in all of it together. Little research has looked at how RF exposure interacts with this growing chemical load; until it does, I don't see how anyone can call the combination safe. I respectfully ask that you: 1. Update exposure limits to account for cumulative, long-term exposure from multiple sources, inside and outside the home, as the 2021 court ruling requires. 2. Require public notice and local input before new towers, small cells, smart meter networks, or surveillance cameras go up in residential neighborhoods, with a no-cost opt-out for smart meters. 3. Require that appliances and home systems with wireless radios offer a wired option or a simple way to disable the radio without losing core function. 4. Require clear labeling of wireless modules on appliances and building systems so families can make informed choices. 5. Fund independent research on chronic exposure and how it interacts with everyday chemical exposures, with attention to children, sleep, and the nervous system. Thank you for considering the people living with these exposures every day. Christy Wallace

My sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation has caused me to radically alter my lifestyle to reduce exposure. I keep my phone is a radiation case and don't use it at night because it keeps me from sleeping. My computer is hardwired and I carry a Blueshield device to harmonize EMF's. It's been 14 years since I've traveled by airplane. Meanwhile, I do everything possible to minimize exposure. By nature I am a sensitive person who has trouble with chemical odors and allergies. I am among the canaries in the coal mine at the moment because we are naturally more sensitive to everything. Surprisingly, about 20 percent of the population is in this predicament. There are so many conditions and health issues associated with this problem. Why the alarms aren't sounding for the increasing exposures for everyone, especially children, is mystifying! Please be proactive and forward thinking regarding the harm this is doing in our world. Corporate profits and greed should not be the governing factor here.

I am an individual consumer, live in St. Louis, Missouri and am 77 years old. My zip code counts 144 mapped antenna sites. My comment here will be highly unscientific, but I have enough concern to access this site write about it here. I do not consider myself to be extreme in my beliefs or personality. All I can say is that I was jittery ... slightly anxious. I decided to do away with everything on my desk (within reason) to see if this could be quelled. I have a large Mac desktop computer that I can't do without. But I did away with my Wi-Fi tower, my electric lamp, my Bluetooth keyboard and wireless mouse. I wired my Ethernet cable to the computer, and wired my keyboard and mouse. Every morning I have coffee, sit quietly, and plan my day. The day after I made the above changes, I sat in my customary chair and exclaimed out loud, "Wow, what a difference!" The energy in the room was so much calmer. I have a mobile phone that I have tried to run on cellular, but it reverts to a generic Wi-Fi that's in my neighborhood. I wish I could be free of all EMFs, as they seem to affect the physical energy all around. Sometimes I wonder if the stress and divisiveness in our country is being exacerbated by the bombardment of electromagnetics that we are not wholly conscious of. Thank you for looking into all of this.

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.

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.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of an active citizen in her eighties who lives alone and has recently recognized and is attempting to protect herself from EMF exposure harms, and who wishes to help spread the word about our societies need to protect citizens especially children from this growing toxin, I have lived with a modern wifi unit (Sonic) in my home for five years, and with an earlier generation of wifi (AT&T) for many years before that. In March 2026 after my yearly blood test, my nutritionist said that the pattern of change in my HbA1c test indicated likelihood of high EMF exposure. For the past 10 years since I've been her client the results have stayed between 5.2 and 5.4. Abruptly this past year it moved up to 5.7, the first number in the pre-diabetic category. As I said to her, I have not significantly changed my diet (no grains or refined sugar, lots of low starch veggies, some berries and citrus, grass-fed and finished meat, pastured eggs, fish). She recommended hard-wiring my computer and getting rid of wi-fi, which I have done. (I do not own a cell phone, smart or otherwise.) It's a distinct relief to not be bathing in wi-fi any more. I've long had tinnitus, which while not vanishing is much reduced, and I sleep better. I do think I may also be impacted by involuntary sources of EMF, namely cell towers and antennas. My nutritionist did a search and found about 2300 antennas and 1900 towers within a 3 mile radius of my house. I do have an EMF meter, and though the extremely high counts in my home are gone (they were in the millions), it still reads higher than 10 in my bedroom. So I am thinking of getting a bed canopy. I do look forward to the results of my next A1c test, hoping to see the numbers lower. I am very concerned about the effects of EMF on our human body health as well as impacts on animals, birds and insects, especially bees. The FCC has only measured the thermal impacts of RF, and that no more recently than 1996. For heaven's sake, there has been no attempt by the FCC to keep up with health impacts of cell phones and RF/EMF development since the pre-flip phone era! This seems a deliberate avoidance of the probable biological impacts on our cells and organs. We are after all electromagnetic beings. Much research has been done on this. Please look up Paul Heroux' work, published February 2026, on EMF and the development of diabetes. I strongly support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

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.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of an advocate, friend, and family member of people who have had adverse reactions to microwave radiation from cell phones, wireless routers, or cell towers. Although I personally do not have a strong immediate adverse reaction to microwave exposure, I know several people who do. Here are some vignettes from my experience: My sister in Utah complained to me about a twitch her 13-year-old grandson had developed, and wanted to take him to a chiropractor to see if anything could be done to help him. I asked her whether anything had changed in his life that might have caused this. She said no, but then called me back and said, yes. They had moved their wireless router into his bedroom. Upon removing it, his twitch went away. I, too, have noticed adverse reactions to wireless devices. I'm pretty adverse to using them at all, but I notice if I send text messages over a period of 10 or 15 minutes, my hands begin to tingle uncomfortably. On one occasion, I attended an event in an enclosed basement auditorium at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington. It was a debate on the potential adverse effects of wireless devices, pitting Dr. Martin Pall against an attorney from the wireless industry. The wireless spokesman laughed at us when we asked that cell phones be put on airplane mode, because the wireless routers in the room were pointed from the ceiling at the attendees. After an hour and a half in that room I developed a headache and body aches, and was grateful to get out of there. I question what effect this was having on students trying to learn something. And why so many babies and young children are born with unusual health problems. And why so many young men are developing prostate cancer, and children in general are developing brain tumors. these are questions that should be addressed prior to the federal government allowing the definition of "broadband" expansion to include wireless and fiber-optice to the premises as if they were the same thing. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.