Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives

Please consider doing more research into the dangers and problems associated with manmade electromagnetic fields. As a holistic and functional nurse practitioner I work with lots of people who struggle with symptoms related to their Wi-Fi routers Bluetooth and cellular devices, smart homes, data centers, 5G radio towers deployed in neighborhoods, smart meters on homes to measure electricity usage. When they are able to turn these devices off and shield themselves and move out of the area where these are deployed, it is remarkable to me how much better they feel. Many people are becoming sicker and sicker all the time and I think it is very important that we look into the effects of man-made electromagnetic fields have on the human body. Over the years I have found ways to cable all of my computers. I’ve gone back to old-fashioned appliances that do not contain Bluetooth and Wi-Fi devices in them. I have covered my smart meter. I have downgraded my Apple iPhone to an 11 which does not have a 5G radio and it has helped me so much. Please research the effects of such devices on children and the elderly before you just blindly allow them to be deployed.

1. & 2. I am responding as: an individual 3a. Type of wireless or RF/EMF sources involved (e.g., mobile phones, Wi-Fi, smart meters…)WiFi, mobile phones, smart TV 3b. Nature, duration, frequency, and approximate timing (e.g., years):25+ years 3c. Adverse health effect(s) experienced:Fatigue, poor concentration, short term memory issues, general malaise and muscle weakness 3d. Time from first exposure to first appearance of adverse health effects; and did a change in exposure coincide with the onset of adverse effects:~2012 with wireless router placed in house on desk in proximity to home computer. Yes, bio-effects immediately recognized. 3e. Was medical evaluation or treatment sought? (Optionally:) Was there a diagnosis?Yes. No EHS specialists in area, DX reduced to CFS/ME syndromes. 3f. Were steps taken to reduce or eliminate exposure, and were there subsequent changes in the effects?Yes, house subsequently wired for Ethernet, low power WiFi router installed and relocated to garage. All wireless transmitters, including Bluetooth/BLE, eliminated or controlled via breaker cut-off switches. 3g. Any supporting documentation? This includes Scientific Reports, exposure measurements, or other relevant information:Yes, See publications of Arthur Firstenberg, Ross Adey, Martin Pall, Leif Safford, Sharon Goldberg, etc. Additional Details you would like to share about your experiences of adverse health effects you believe to be associated with exposure to wireless radiation or EMF's:Interuption of Cellular Metabolism via generation of ROS, notable changes in VGCC's, alteration of mitochondrial electron transport chains, DNA damage and changes across multiple species as evidenced in mitosis and apoptosis. B1a. Sources you experience as causing you Adverse Effects:Proximity to WiFi routers, unshielded cell phones and unshielded house wiring (dirty electricity) B1b. Sources you can sense, but don't seem to harm you:Bluetooth/BLE B1c. Sources you can use without sensing or being harmed:Cell phones at over 4 feet B1d. Sources that seem to provide benefit (i.e., electrotherapy):Distance from sources, aggressive rest therapy, grounding and transport to new environments B2a. Health conditions you think may contribute to your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless:excessive fatigue, problems with short term memory and concentration, muscle and joint weakness. B2b. Health conditions you don't necessarily associate with your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless, but might be relevant:CFS/ME Lyme B3. For each subquestion please list up to 5 drugs or therapies or home remedies (if any) B3a. That you recommend, as they helped you tolerate or recover from EMF exposure:Sauna, outdoor walks, excessive rest B3b. That you recommend, but you’re not positive that they help:Diet B3c. That helped you but you don’t recommend. (e.g., the benefit did not last long or the side effects were too harmful):Most B3d. Treatments that had no effect:none B3e. Treatments that made your sensitivity worse:55-64 B4. What is your age range?55-64 B5. What year did you become aware of your sensitivity to wireless radiation or electromagnetic fields?1994 B6. What country, state, province, or major city were you living in when you first noticed your sensitivity to wireless or electromagnetic fields?New York City

I already react to chemicals which enables me to travel by car so I decided to try an electric bike to which I then started having symptoms which developed in to me reacting to emfs and Wi-Fi. I have to have Ethernet cables to use the internet which I still react to but my children use it. I can’t watch tv or go to the cinema with my children anymore. Visitor have to put their phones in faraday bags so I don’t so I don’t get ill. can’t go in public places where there moblie phones tv or music playing. Can’t go on camp sites where there Wi-Fi. My children now have go on holiday without there mum because I can’t fly due all the emfs radiation. I can’t have X-rays or mammograms due to radiation.

I already react to chemicals which enables me to travel by car so I decided to try an electric bike to which I then started having symptoms which developed in to me reacting to emfs and Wi-Fi. I have to have Ethernet cables to use the internet which I still react to but my children use it. I can’t watch tv or go to the cinema with my children anymore. Visitor have to put their phones in faraday bags so I don’t so I don’t get ill. can’t go in public places where there moblie phones tv or music playing. Can’t go on camp sites where there Wi-Fi. My children now have go on holiday without there mum because I can’t fly due all the emfs radiation. I can’t have X-rays or mammograms due to radiation.

Yes I'm very sensitive to the Wi-Fi and I certainly I did this survey before but I wasn't sure if it was if you got it because now the library person here who's helping me can't seem to find the questions that I answered before now I guess you just want to comment well I'm this the last day of the survey and I'd like to say hi I see that now you are requiring comments and before we had surveys last week I did it and it was a survey with questions well regardless I'd like to say that it's very important that I keep my non-internet landline and very up in arms that AT&t will not fix mine on internet landline and I'm taking them to court because of this because I have great difficulty doing anything on digital devices anymore yes and it's important that we get FCC and new studies get done on safety studies regarding these phones because I just read that European Union has found evidence that children are getting higher radiation than adults with these devices and I certainly without a doubt see how they affect me and I definitely think that like non-inter like landlines should you stay and I want to be alert to any litigation involving this matter because I would like to get it an attorney to help represent me but if that isn't the case I'll represent myself because they took my ability of waiting to protect myself.

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.

Studying the health effects of wireless (RF) radiation when so many people have complained that they experience health problems after a smart meter was installed at their home or a wireless antenna went up near their place (let alone against their will) should just be common sense. I as a concerned citizen find it scary that wireless technologies are proliferating rapidly yet the health effects of them are not being addressed by appropriate authorities. My family members all insist on using their cell phones and WiFi devices in close proximity to me, every group home where they house people with disabilities (some of which RF radiation may have caused their disabilities) I have been in has WiFi and does not offer cable/ethernet internet access in the residents’ bedrooms. One group home I looked into even keeps the WiFi router for the entire house in a resident’s bedroom! And yet, our agencies that regulate the radiofrequency spectrum have not addressed the health effects of wireless radiation. Please step up to the plate and study the health effects of RF radiation. I hope that this does not turn into a campaign to take electronic devices away from young people. The appropriate response to young people being exposed to RF radiation is the same as what you would do and recommend for adults: Educate young people about the risks of using wireless devices and how they can reduce these risks (e. g., by holding wireless devices as far away from one’s body as possible), and provide them hardwired connections to reduce their dependence on wireless devices for communication to begin with. And adopting “best practices” rules for the placement of infrastructure that produces RF radiation to balance the need for the public to have access to communications and communication devices with the need to keep our exposure to RF radiation to the minimum levels necessary and to protect people with EMR syndrome. Thank you for your time and attention to this issue.

To the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:I submit these comments on the HHS Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure (HHS-OASH-2026-0397). I urge HHS to evaluate the substantial evidence of biological effects and potential adverse health outcomes from RF/EMF exposures, including levels below current federal limits, and to identify research gaps and protective recommendations, especially for children and vulnerable populations.Personal ExperienceMy bedroom is about 20 feet from a neighbor’s smart meter. Since its installation I have suffered severe debilitating headaches, muscle spasms, cramps, occasional heart palpitations, and other unusual sensations. These symptoms align with scientific literature on non-thermal biological effects of RF radiation and non-ionizing EMFs.Scientific Evidence (Resources Incorporated by Reference)Electrosensitivity: Functional MRI studies by Dr. Gunnar Heuser et al. (Reviews on Environmental Health, 2017) found abnormal scans in all 10 patients with electromagnetic hypersensitivity after long-term EMF exposure, showing consistent hyper-connectivity in the anterior default-mode network. Conventional MRI was largely normal. The authors proposed fMRI as a diagnostic aid. Prevalence studies in Australia, Canada, and the U.S. further document wireless sensitivity and co-morbidities.Industry acknowledgment of non-thermal effects: Swisscom patent WO2004075583A1 addresses electrosmog as a known health problem, cites non-thermal DNA damage and chromosomal instability in human blood cells linked to cancer risk, and proposes emission-reduction methods. The 2000 ECOLOG Institute review for T-Mobile (over 220 studies) found strong evidence of cancer-initiating/promoting effects, DNA breaks, chromosomal damage, fertility impacts, and teratogenic effects far below then-existing guidelines, and recommended much lower precautionary limits.Comprehensive reviews: The BioInitiative Report (2007/2012 and updates) documents DNA damage, neurological, cancer, reproductive, and immune effects at levels far below FCC/ICNIRP limits and calls for biologically based standards. Additional reviews cover neurological/cognitive effects, male fertility, impacts on children, parotid gland tumors, glioma associations, cell-tower epidemiology, and wildlife effects (bees, birds, etc.).DNA, cancer, and other effects: Studies show DNA damage, oxidative stress, and non-thermal mechanisms. U.S. National Toxicology Program research reported statistically significant tumor increases (including heart schwannomas) with RF exposure. Literature also addresses effects on implanted medical devices.Emerging technologies: Patents and programs on wireless body-area networks, nano-sensors/devices, brain-computer interfaces (including DARPA non-surgical neurotech), and bio-nano systems raise unanswered questions on cumulative health effects, safety data, and informed consent. Havana Syndrome cases among federal employees further highlight the need to evaluate directed-energy and pulsed RF exposures.Regulatory history: Older industry manuals, EPA correspondence, GAO reports, NIOSH materials, and prior FCC documents show longstanding awareness of potential non-thermal effects. Current U.S. limits, largely unchanged since 1996 and based on thermal thresholds, do not adequately address today’s continuous, multi-source, pulsed exposures from phones, Wi-Fi, 5G/6G, IoT devices, and wearables.Key Responses to the RFI Science and effects below limits: Peer-reviewed evidence, industry patents, and reviews show genotoxic, neurological, reproductive, and immune effects at non-thermal levels. Thermal-only standards are insufficient. Cumulative exposures: Real-world simultaneous multi-source exposures are not adequately reflected in current testing or limits. Vulnerable groups: Children, people with electrosensitivity, and those with implanted devices require special attention. Research gaps: Independent studies are needed on electrosensitivity (with objective markers such as fMRI), long-term low-level and cumulative exposures, nano/bio-interfaces, environmental impacts, and device interactions—free of industry conflicts of interest. Recommendations: Support biologically based limits with safety margins, real-world testing protocols, transparent public information, wired alternatives where feasible, accommodations for sensitive individuals, and coordinated federal research. The precautionary principle is appropriate given widespread exposure and available risk-reduction options. I urge HHS to treat this evidence seriously, close research gaps, and develop health-protective recommendations for policymakers, families, schools, and communities. All Exhibits are incorporated by reference in their entirety. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Respectfully submitted,

I first became aware of the health impacts of RF/EMF emissions when our County Council in Montgomery County, Maryland was preparing a zoning text amendment (ZTA) that would allow small cell antennas as close as 30 feet to single-family homes, and as close as 10 feet to mixed zoning apartment buildings, and as a growing movement opposing this ZTA was quickly forming. Thanks to the research I was made aware of, it did not take long to realize that my family and I had been experiencing significant health impacts from a cluster of 42 cell antennas mounted less than 500 feet away on a high rise in the valley below our home, including worsening auto-immune conditions, frequent and persistent headaches, heart palpitations, and insomnia. I was stunned when learning that the FCC was operating and regulating cell antenna placement using safety standards from 1996 that were based on the thermal effects of single exposure to humans, given that these technologies have not only become exponentially more powerful, but we are now surrounded by an enormous amount of them, 24/7. I was also stunned to learn that ample research showing a multitude of detrimental effects on human health existed, but had been heavily suppressed by industry. What shocked me the most, however, was that it was written into the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that state or local governments are prohibited from denying applications for cell antenna placement due to environmental effects, which has been interpreted by multiple U.S. Circuit Courts to include "health concerns." Two years later, when we moved into a home where we had used an RF/EMF meter to evaluate the emission levels as one of the many variables that were important to us, the change was fundamental. Within a few days, the persistent headaches had dissipated, the heart palpitations stopped, and we were able to sleep again. If I hadn't been convinced before, this cemented my conviction of how toxic these emissions are. Moreover, two of my auto-immune conditions improved significantly over the following months, and they have continued to improve - one of them measurably, as it is appearing that my Hashimoto's Hypothyroidism is reversing, and I have been able to continue to lower my doses of replacement thyroid hormone multiple times, after only increasing it for the ten years prior since my diagnosis. It is nearly impossible to avoid exposure to ever-increasing cumulative RF/EMF emissions, however, and under the current regulation - which includes the swift passing of the above mentioned ZTA by our County Council - a cell antenna can legally be mounted on the telephone pole right outside our home anytime. Updating the regulations regarding the placement of wireless facilities (cell antennas) is long overdue, and I urge you to take the science and detrimental effects on the environment and human health into consideration this time. Cell towers do not belong near homes, schools, eldercare facilities, or any other place where vulnerable humans spend a lot of time. In addition, rather than pushing more and more wireless technology on society, fund and encourage safe technologies, such as fiber-optic wired internet, whenever possible. Thank you for your attention on this matter.

I am submitting my experience with EMFS. I have become sensitive to EMF, RF and wireless radiation after my then husband bought an electric car. The more and more I was in this car the worse headaches I got. I also began to struggle to find the words when speaking and felt heart palpitations. However I soon also began to experience headache when on my mobile phone. I couldn't speak to anyone for more than 5 mins or the side of my face and head felt burning and the headache was intense. I also now also get tingling feeling in my fingers if I use a touchscreen on wifi. I have had to change my home to ethernet connection as I can no longer tolerate the symptoms. I have to avoid busy places both inside and outside due to the amount of mobile phones around me. I cannot go and enjoy life, see friends etc. This has really hampered my ability to live and normal life. I cannot go into an electric vechical. My local authority has replaced the public buses with EV buses which I cannot access. This is a disability and should be seen as such. There are thousands of studies showing non-thermal effects of radiation. You need to stop putting the money and lobbying from telecoms before the actual evidence.