Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives

I am a Licensed Electrician and perform EMF Mitigation for private residences. I received training through the Building Biology Institute and am in process to be certified through BBI as an Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist. For the past 6 years I have measured and mitigated electromagnetic fields in homes with a primary focus on sleeping areas. My work is guided by the Building Biology Evaluation Guidelines, which are based on the precautionary principle and the goal of creating environments that support long-term health rather than merely avoiding acute thermal injury. I appreciate HHS’s initiative to examine RF/EMF exposures, particularly as they affect children and other vulnerable populations. There exists a large gap between U.S. standards and precautionary guidelines. U.S. and ICNIRP standards are based almost exclusively on heating (thermal) effects. A substantial body of peer-reviewed research documents non-thermal biological effects at levels far below those limits. Mechanisms repeatedly discussed in the literature and observed in practice include activation of voltage-gated calcium channels leading to oxidative stress, disruption of melatonin and circadian rhythms, DNA damage, increased blood-brain barrier permeability, and effects on sperm and reproductive tissue. From my professional experience, the most consistent and rapidly reversible effects are on sleep quality and overnight recovery. Clients frequently report improvements in sleep, energy, headaches, heart palpitations, cognitive clarity, and skin sensations after reduction of nighttime exposures, even when daytime exposures remain largely unchanged. These observations align with the emphasis Building Biology places on sleeping areas. Children are of particular concern. Their thinner skulls, higher tissue conductivity, developing nervous and immune systems, and longer cumulative lifetime exposure increase vulnerability. I regularly encounter elevated RF and AC electric/magnetic fields in children’s bedrooms from Wi-Fi routers, baby monitors, cordless phones, cell phones, tablets, gaming devices, smart meters, and poorly designed electrical wiring. Building Biology Evaluation Guidelines for Sleeping Areas: • Radiofrequency: ideally < 0.1–10 µW/m² • AC magnetic fields: < 0.2–1 mG (20–100 nT) • AC electric fields / body voltage: very low (typically aiming for body voltage < 10–100 mV) These levels are orders of magnitude below current FCC public exposure limits. Several European medical associations (e.g., Austrian Medical Association, EUROPAEM) and the BioInitiative reports have recommended substantially lower precautionary limits than those adopted in the United States. To address the current research gaps, the following areas should be prioritized: • Long-term studies of chronic, low-level, pulsed RF exposures typical of real-world environments (Wi-Fi, 4G/5G, DECT, smart meters) rather than short-term, continuous-wave laboratory exposures. • Effects on sleep architecture, melatonin, and overnight recovery in children and adolescents. • Combined exposures (RF + dirty electricity/microsurge electrical pollution + AC electric and magnetic fields). • Identification of susceptible subgroups (including those with electrohypersensitivity/EMR syndrome) and objective biomarkers. • Prospective studies of mitigation effectiveness in homes and schools. Recommendations: 1. Prioritize sleeping areas — Turn off or place Wi-Fi routers in airplane mode at night; keep cell phones and tablets out of bedrooms or in airplane mode; prefer hardwired Ethernet connections. 2. Reduce close-range device use — Encourage speakerphone, wired headsets, or airplane mode for children; avoid carrying phones against the body. 3. Address electrical environment — Identify and correct wiring errors that elevate magnetic fields; consider demand switches or circuit control for bedrooms to reduce AC electric fields during sleep; minimize dirty electricity from dimmers, inverters, and certain electronics. 4. School and institutional settings — Prefer hardwired networks where feasible; locate wireless access points away from classrooms and offices; provide low-EMF options for sensitive students. 5. Siting of infrastructure — Avoid placing cell antennas, small cells, and smart meters in close proximity to homes, schools, and daycare facilities. 6. Education — Provide clear, accessible information so parents, teachers, and clinicians can make informed choices while research continues. I urge HHS to incorporate precautionary considerations for non-thermal effects into its evaluation, especially for children, and to support independent research that examines real-world exposure patterns and mitigation outcomes. Practitioner observations and the existing body of non-thermal research should be weighed alongside the thermal-only framework that currently underpins U.S. standards. Respectfully, William Pursino

I submit this comment as a 27-year-old resident of France who has experienced localized physiological and neurological symptoms associated with ambient and near-field electromagnetic environments since early 2021. My experience highlights the importance of assessing whether current regulatory standards adequately address real-world exposure conditions and individual sensitivities. Firstly of all, current testing protocols often assess wireless devices under controlled conditions that may not fully reflect simultaneous use of GPS, cellular data, and Wi-Fi. Such multi-radio activity can affect device power consumption, heat generation, and exposure levels. I therefore encourage the Commission to evaluate simultaneous transmissions in realistic operating and handling conditions when reviewing Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) and power-density standards. Relevant industry developments, including U.S. Patent No. US20120231784A1, illustrate the technical challenges of managing emissions in multi-radio systems. Secondly, exposure assessments should also consider the broader environmental context. Atmospheric electricity, temperature, low-frequency fields, and device-generated noise may coexist in everyday settings. Although their combined physiological effects require further investigation, I encourage the Commission to support research into potential interactions between environmental factors and neurological responses, including symptoms reported by sensitive individuals. Thirdly, metal enclosures such as trains, subways, elevators, and vehicle cabins can affect signal reception and prompt mobile devices to adjust transmission power. These changing conditions may produce exposure patterns not adequately represented by averaged outdoor measurements. Testing should therefore include realistic indoor and enclosed transport environments, transient transmission peaks, and common device-use positions. Furthermore, building materials, architectural design, and local topography can also influence radiofrequency distribution. Masonry may attenuate signals, while windows, upper floors, and reflections from nearby structures can create variations in indoor exposure. I encourage the FCC to collaborate with architects, engineers, and materials scientists to investigate shielding materials, develop standardized testing methods, and assess practical measures to reduce indoor exposure where appropriate. Finally, disabling wireless interfaces and using wired connections may reduce radiofrequency emissions, but electronic devices continue to generate low-frequency electromagnetic fields, heat, and other electrical emissions. I therefore recommend that regulatory bodies assess these sources alongside radiofrequency emissions, including during close-proximity use of battery-powered and mains-powered electronics. In conclusion, I respectfully encourage regulatory authorities to review existing safety standards in light of realistic device operation, changing environmental conditions, building characteristics, and emissions across different frequency ranges. Further independent research and appropriately precautionary safety margins could help clarify potential non-thermal effects and improve protection for the general public, including individuals reporting heightened sensitivities.

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.

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…)Wi-Fi 3b. Nature, duration, frequency, and approximate timing (e.g., years):Approx 15 years 3c. Adverse health effect(s) experienced:Agitation/racing heart, abnormal, extreme fatigue (not related to activity, sleep, or other illness). Headaches. 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:Appeared gradually, began to notice feeling better when away from wireless devices and worse near them. 3e. Was medical evaluation or treatment sought? (Optionally:) Was there a diagnosis?No 3f. Were steps taken to reduce or eliminate exposure, and were there subsequent changes in the effects?Yes. Removed all Wi-Fi from house, moved from house that had smart meter, limited cell phone use (turned off while driving or not using), connected to ethernet at home (bought iphone, as Android did not do this), tried protective clothing, hired home building biologist consultants to test EMF and mitigate. Did EMF research, added supplements. Reduced time in crowds, airports, places with high EMF. 3g. Any supporting documentation? This includes Scientific Reports, exposure measurements, or other relevant information:There is a wealth of science showing EMF damage to living organisms. https://bioinitiative.org/table-of-contents/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935122023659 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1538544223000238 https://https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27738269/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27738269/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24064953/ 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: B1a. Sources you experience as causing you Adverse Effects:Wi-Fi, cell phones, smart meters, cell towers, radiowave sensors from cars (in heavy traffic) B1b. Sources you can sense, but don't seem to harm you: B1c. Sources you can use without sensing or being harmed:I sense less harm from a device on airplane mode connected to a wired network (assuming I am not surrounded by others using Wi-Fi). B1d. Sources that seem to provide benefit (i.e., electrotherapy):Micro-current B2a. Health conditions you think may contribute to your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless:History of Lyme disease B2b. Health conditions you don't necessarily associate with your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless, but might be relevant:Osteopenia 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:H2 (Molecular Hydrogen) B3b. That you recommend, but you’re not positive that they help:Niacin (flushing type) 25 mg B3c. That helped you but you don’t recommend. (e.g., the benefit did not last long or the side effects were too harmful):Essential oils. Homeopathic EMF remedies. B3d. Treatments that had no effect:EMF hat, sometimes gives me a headache. As if the beam is bouncing around in there. 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?2011 B6. What country, state, province, or major city were you living in when you first noticed your sensitivity to wireless or electromagnetic fields?Orangevale, California

I am writing to share concerns about EMFs, RF, and wireless radiation exposure. It is my understanding that US studies and regulations are out of date. The stakes are high; we need to have a clear picture of the impacts on human health, wildlife, the environment, and privacy rights. (See link to learn about some known health effects.) I have a PhD in Human Sciences and understand research (and conflict of interest in research). We need to study these areas further before developing additional, related technologies. I know of people who have had to relocate and unplug connections and apply protective fabric due to impacts on their health. (We are hard wired in our house.) Citizens need informed consent, and future generations need us to call out conflict of interest and apply the Precautionary Principle. Thank you for consideration. Sincerely, Stacey S. PhD https://childrenshealthdefense.org/emr/education/

I am submitting this as a concerned member of the public. We have a right to know what we are being exposed to. Current wireless radiation (RF/EMF from cell phones, Wi-Fi, 5G/6G, smart meters, cell towers, and everyday devices) is treated as if it is fully understood and safely managed. It is not. People cannot give informed consent when the information is incomplete, outdated, or buried. What must be made public and easy for ordinary people to access: Real-world exposure levels (not just laboratory SAR numbers), including cumulative and simultaneous exposure from multiple sources in homes, schools, workplaces, and public spaces. Clear, plain-language disclosure of potential biological and health effects reported in the scientific literature, including effects at levels below current FCC limits, especially for children, pregnant women, and other vulnerable groups. Exact locations, power levels, and frequencies of cell towers, small cells, and other wireless infrastructure near homes, schools, and playgrounds—updated in real time and without requiring FOIA requests. Independent (non-industry-funded) research summaries and the full underlying data, so the public can see what is known, what is uncertain, and where the gaps are. Practical ways people can reduce exposure, and the option to choose wired alternatives without penalty or loss of service. No one should be forced into continuous, involuntary exposure without transparent information and meaningful choice. Public health requires the precautionary principle when the science is still evolving and the exposure is universal. Please prioritize full disclosure, independent research, and genuine consent over industry convenience. Thank you for opening this process.

I read a case that I also sent as an earlier comment about someone mildening their EMF sensitivity through usage of Reishi mushrooms. I believe EMF sensitivity has to do with a mixture of the microbiome, mineral composition in the body, body pathways for transfer of various molecules and possibly as Gerald Pollack has mentioned Wifi might influence on EZ water (upcoming term in biology). This could be some of why people react differently at different times and to different frequencies and environmental exposure. Because they have different body states, at the smaller levels and compositions. There are also EMF fron different sources. Smart meters, power lines, routers, phones, "dirty electricity" as some call it from house wires, phone towers, power stations. People could react different to them at times. Sometimes the EMF can bounce around inside houses and electronics too and target in other ways. About EMF and mold. Mold grows or is inhibited by different frequencies. It is likely similar with other life forms and parts of life forms. Just like we can receive sunlight and it has influence on our blood sugar, nitric oxide, vitamin D levels, brain neurons and more. This means it is likely EMF can influence some "channels" in some people. Or that "frequency resistance" varies from person to person or by health state. Here are some suggestions that might help lower the EMF rates in society. - Better software can improve the call and data transmission without increasing EMF. Through using compressed data, codecs, agreements on "this data id equals that data", like putting together pre-made factory parts saves time and can be done from an instruction manual, some of this is already done but we might optimize and do it further across software. - Data that isnt in a rush to be sent, can be sent via wire when possible. - Cables can be shielded better. - We might be able to use radio frequencies that cause less issues in life forms, for example like how background radiation from space doesnt cause as much interaction seemingly. Here are some suggestions that might look into why some people are more sensitive than others and what can be done about it. - Comprehensive microbiome and mineral tests. I suggest to consult with specialized labs and maybe naturopaths too. As people reach out to them at times when the allopathic system doesnt help. It is possible that EMF is worse in people who have digestive issues, too many or too little of certain minerals. - Tests with mushroom exposure, to see if certain species helps people with EMF sensitivity feel worse or better. There might be help to find in anecdotes already shared online such as the one with Reishi mushrooms. LLMs could help search for it. And TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine) and Ayurveda (holistic Indian medicine) might have ideas for it. Also ancient European and Middle Eastern medicine might have ideas for it. - There is likely an overlap between the EMF and mold health issues since EMF influences mold growth.

I am not a scientist or tech person. I only know what i have personally observed and felt. In the past five years, I have noticed a decline of pollinators, bees and butterflies, in my organic chemically-free gardens. I have also been experiencing dizzy spells for no reason when I go outside or in public places. My home has low radiation levels which I monitor. With the introduction of 5G, smart meters and discontinuation of copper based landlines, etc the world is being surrounded more and more by wireless radiation. Please, it is time to review safe radiation level standards and put a hold onto what we are doing. Please, place better safety issues on this technology! Thank you, thank you, thank you! Create a wonderful day!

. & 2. I am responding as: 3a. Type of wireless or RF/EMF sources involved (e.g., mobile phones, Wi-Fi, smart meters…)Apple phones with latest updates 3b. Nature, duration, frequency, and approximate timing (e.g., years):Tumor on thumb for a year with agonizing searing pain in the presence of cellular phones, but absolutely updated Apple phones. I have generalized EMF sensitivity for 10 years as a background with fatigue. 3c. Adverse health effect(s) experienced:Fatigue Agonizing pain Nausea and vomiting 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:The change would’ve been the tumor coming on my thumb with a fungal infection and as soon as that started to be controlled, the pain totally goes away with the iPhones 3e. Was medical evaluation or treatment sought? (Optionally:) Was there a diagnosis?Yes 3f. Were steps taken to reduce or eliminate exposure, and were there subsequent changes in the effects?My home was mitigated 10 years ago. I have no Wi-Fi in the house. Everyone’s cell phone is off in my house. We are ethernet. My problem was when I went anywhere. 3g. Any supporting documentation? This includes Scientific Reports, exposure measurements, or other relevant information:Oh, we could talk for days on the metering my husband and I have done in our home. The one other wild card was installing Starlink. Plugging in the Starlink put the dirty energy in the house up to 1700! I know that is not the focus of the study, but that was a huge part of my problem until we mitigated the one plug for Starlink. 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: B1a. Sources you experience as causing you Adverse Effects:Dirty energy, magnetic fields, Wi-Fi, cellular phones, especially Apple phones that are newly updated. Transformers on the powerlines, kitchen appliances. B1b. Sources you can sense, but don't seem to harm you:Before the tumor on my thumb, I would’ve said being around cell phones. But that tumor was ago agony with cell phones. B1c. Sources you can use without sensing or being harmed:Ethernet Provide be B1d. Sources that seem to provide benefit (i.e., electrotherapy):Frequency, specific micro current Rife PEMF Photo wave therapy B2a. Health conditions you think may contribute to your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless:Massive fungal infection in the thumb. If I am in Wi-Fi or EMR’s out of the home, it causes blistering on the thumb and severe pain. History of Lyme, disease and fatigue and mild exposure B2b. Health conditions you don't necessarily associate with your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless, but might be relevant:After reading the invisible rainbow, everything is connected to it. 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:Avoidance Greenwave and Satik filters Astaxanthan Ray wave Supplement EMF protective clothing B3b. That you recommend, but you’re not positive that they help:The products they sell for cell phones to put on your cell phone to mitigate B3c. That helped you but you don’t recommend. (e.g., the benefit did not last long or the side effects were too harmful):A lot of the filters they sell to mitigate it for your cell phone B3d. Treatments that had no effect:Having to go to places blasting with Wi-Fi and dirty energy for my treatments. And everybody else on staff walking around with their cell phones. 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?Around 2015 I was dealing with mold, exposures and lime. I bought a hybrid car and that pushed my body over the edge for wireless and dirty energy. B6. What country, state, province, or major city were you living in when you first noticed your sensitivity to wireless or electromagnetic fields?Michigan Link to HHS Comment Submission Form

I started noticing in early 2000 that I was experiencing unusual symptoms when I would go to the larger towns that were installing the 5G towers. My first experience my body began vibrating and other people actually could feel it if they hugged me. I then began experiencing a mild headache that proceeded to get worse as the day went on. By the time I got home I was feeling as if I was getting a cold, which never came to fruition, but I was aware something was different in the environment. I fortunately live in a very rural area and currently have no towers near my house. At that time I owned a cell phone for only a couple years and by 2024, I had to get rid of it as it was causing my heart to have fluttering and my left hand that I carried it in began to swell. I now have hard wired service at my home and must avoid all larger cities in my state that have high EMF/RF frequencies. It's a horrible feeling when I do need to go to those areas as it obviously makes me ill feeling with the stimulation to my mitochondria.