Reproduction & pregnancy

i am writing in regards to my own complaint and concern about wireless radiation. I experience intermittent pain in my wrist and hand while holding and using my cell phone. I have owned multiple different cell phone and used different carriers and this has been an ongoing problem for over ten years. This is clearly abnormal and I do not feel good about using an object that causes pain, however I feel I have been pushed, along with our entire society, into using technology that I do not believe is safe or beneficial to human biology. I would really be happy if an honest study and report by the HHS would be done on the effects of EMF, Radiofrequency Radiation and Wireless Radiation on human life. I feel that human life needs to be protected from damaging technologies. I believe that phone and cell tower industries are more interested in monetary profit than the effects of the technologies on human life, especially babies, pregnant mothers and children. May the HHS please place people over profits.

First, I want to thank you for asking the important health questions of our time! Yes, I believe that wireless radiation exposure has significantly shrunk my testicles. They used to really be quite heavy and I was getting at least, oh I don't know, three or four inches of sack sag but now the skin is consistently quite tight. I've tried weighing them on my kitchen scale but the old ball and chain is not too fond when I try but I'd guess at least an ounce. I'm not sure if this is a decrease in sperm though I have not been blessed with children yet - likely due to the radiation! Again, thank you so much for looking into this and MABBA (Make American Balls Big Again) See attachment for the best before and after so have of my testicles

Hello - I will be providing information to the effects of these catastrophic frequencies and radiation exposures and I demand that the FCC and HHS release their findings on this as well to the public. It has been presented before but shoved off as "We don't deal with humans, only frequencies." There is so much proof out there it is absurd that our government and the tech companies keep slowly killing the global populations with these weapons; that is what they are. See below info and any attachments on this. The peer-reviewed and human evidence submitted to federal regulators establishes that exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs), radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and wireless radiation produces a wide range of measurable biological harms—not merely theoretical thermal risks. As documented in the FCC docket, filings contained "peer-reviewed studies showing radiofrequency radiation contributing to cell damage, DNA damage, infertility, carcinogenicity, cognitive deficits, and cardiovascular disruption, among a wide array of negative health effects". This body of evidence—over 11,000 pages—was dismissed by the FCC, whose representative reportedly told an injured petitioner, "We don't deal with humans, only frequencies". Cancer Risk and Official Recognition The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies RF radiation as "possibly carcinogenic to humans". Professor Lennart Hardell is responsible for this classification based on evidence linking wireless radiation to increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma [A-2]. The National Toxicology Program's own study found "clear evidence linking cell phone use to heart tumors in rats, with some evidence also linking it to brain and adrenal tumors" [A-1]. A review led by Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, concluded there is "substantial scientific evidence" that RFR causes "cancer, endocrine, and neurological problems, as well as many other negative health effects". The Causal Mechanism: Oxidative Stress At the cellular level, the primary mechanism of harm appears to be oxidative stress. According to Children's Health Defense, the evidence identified a "causal mechanism of harm" found in 203 out of 225 studies: oxidative stress, "which can lead to cancer, non-cancer conditions, and DNA damage". Professor Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry at Washington State University, confirmed that "current EMFs can cause lowered fertility, neurological/psychiatric effects, DNA damage, apoptosis, oxidative stress, endocrine effects, cancer, genetic and epigenetic changes, inflammation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and cardiac effects". Children Are Disproportionately Vulnerable Children face heightened risk. Research has found that "children's brains absorb 2-3 times more radiation than an adult's". This vulnerability is compounded by the fact that substantially more children are using cell phones from younger ages. The 5G Escalation The rollout of 5G represents a dramatic escalation. Unlike previous technologies, 5G uses "frequencies between 24 GHz and 100 GHz, known as millimeter-wave frequencies". Israeli researchers found that "our sweat ducts act as antennas for millimeter waves, meaning we would absorb more energy into our bodies". Professor Pall warned that "5G will inevitably produce universal or almost universal very early-onset Alzheimer's dementia and may cause near-universal autism" . Critically, "there are no safety studies on 5G", and Senator Richard Blumenthal concluded after a Senate hearing, "So there really is no research ongoing. We're kind of flying blind here, as far as health and safety are concerned". Brain, Sleep and Mitochondrial Effects The evidence further shows effects on the brain, "including impaired blood flow and damage to the blood-brain barrier, cognitive and memory problems, and effects on sleep, melatonin production, and mitochondrial damage". These findings are especially significant because mitochondrial dysfunction is central to chronic degenerative disease processes. Dr. Erica Mallery-Blythe emphasized that "the relationship between radiation intensity and biological effects is not linear," and that EMFs interact with chemicals, genetics, nutrition, and stress in ways that "can exponentially worsen these biological effects". Conclusion The evidence is clear: EMF, RFR and wireless radiation exposure produces oxidative stress, DNA damage, cancer, neurological harm, reproductive damage, and mitochondrial dysfunction.

Thank you for taking comments. As a parent, I'm concerned that children (and fetuses) are particularly vulnerable to EMF radiation. They are not able speak for themselves on this topic and so I urge you to take into account research showing this increased vulnerablility into your decisions. Please see recent relevant studies attached. Thank you for your time.

Smart meter installed and my 19 year old was having Chest pains. He even called an ambulance. Once smart meter removed he was fine. This was not just one incident. Also the smart meter was causing itching skin for my husband & I. We thought it was bugs but your skin microbiome is affected! Once smart meter gone, stopped this. We turn Wi-Fi off at night. Was causing my 17 year old nose bleeds when he slept. Also Wi-Fi was causing irregular menstrual bleeding during menopause. Where i avoided a hysterectomy just by turning Wi-Fi off. When i am nearb 5G towers i bleed .

I am an informed citizen and parent. I request that federal agencies dramatically lower current exposure limits, adopt a rigorous and enforceable precautionary principle, and fund long-term independent research. Current limits are dangerously outdated and ignore exponential exposure growth. FCC/ICNIRP limits were set in the 1990s based on a single acute thermal model, for a world with a handful of cell towers and no Wi-Fi, no smart meters, no small cells, no 5G. That world no longer exists. The ambient RF environment has not merely grown -- it has multiplied. RF levels in Los Angeles were found to be 70 times higher than the EPA's own estimate from four decades earlier. Small cell deployment alone increases downlink RF emissions by a factor of 7 to 46. Bandara & Carpenter (Lancet Planetary Health, 2018) documented "planetary electromagnetic pollution" -- an unprecedented, compounding increase, with 68% of 2,266 reviewed studies showing significant biological effects. 5G densification makes this worse: millimeter waves require an order-of-magnitude increase in antenna density, placing transmitters at street level, in front of homes, schools, and hospitals. The public is being subjected to a massive, unconsented experiment in cumulative RF exposure, and the regulatory framework has not been updated. ICBE-EMF, Environ Health 21:92 (2022): current limits are based on invalid assumptions. Melnick et al., Environ Health (2026): applying EPA's own methodology, limits are at least 200x too high for cancer risk and 8-24x too high for male reproductive toxicity. The precautionary principle must be applied -- not merely acknowledged. The precautionary principle is codified in the Rio Declaration (Principle 15), the EU Treaty (Art. 191), and the Convention on Biological Diversity. Where there are threats of serious harm, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used to postpone preventive measures. In the U.S., it has been systematically ignored in RF policy. FCC limits are set at the level of thermal injury -- the highest measurable effect -- rather than at a level that protects against non-thermal, chronic, or cumulative effects. This is a permissive threshold, not a protective one. I call on HHS to: Formally adopt the precautionary principle and ALARA standard in all RF policy; Establish interim precautionary limits at least 10-100x below current values for homes, schools, hospitals, nurseries (consistent with Council of Europe Resolution 1815/2011, which recommends 0.2 V/m -- roughly 1/100th of the current U.S. limit); Prohibit RF transmitters within 300m of schools and hospitals until long-term safety is demonstrated; Mandate transparent public disclosure of RF parameters near residential areas. Inaction is not a neutral position. When a population faces a compounding, invisible, inescapable increase in a physical agent, the only ethical course is to reduce exposure now, while research proceeds. Biological effects below current limits are well documented. IARC/WHO (2013): RF classified "possibly carcinogenic" (Group 2B). NTP (2018): "Clear evidence" of malignant cardiac schwannomas in male rats; "some evidence" for gliomas. Lai & Levitt, Rev Environ Health 39(3) (2024): oxidative stress, DNA damage, blood-brain barrier disruption below FCC limits. Bandara & Carpenter (2018): 68% of 2,266 studies showed significant biological effects. Sensitive populations require stricter protection. Children, fetuses, the elderly, and workers must be evaluated separately. Developing tissues are more vulnerable, no cradle-to-grave studies exist. The precautionary principle demands the highest protection for those who cannot consent. Cumulative exposure is unaddressed. Current limits treat each source in isolation. In reality, a resident is simultaneously exposed to multiple towers, small cells, Wi-Fi, smart meters, and 5G infrastructure. HHS must evaluate cumulative, neighborhood-level exposure. Recommendations: (a) Fund a long-term independent federal research program with prenatal/pediatric cohorts, reproductive endpoints, blinded pathology, open data; (b) Issue immediate interim guidelines (wired connections in schools, RF-off zones in bedrooms); (c) Require transparent consumer and school disclosure of RF parameters; (d) Establish a precautionary review mechanism that automatically tightens limits when new evidence of harm emerges. The ambient RF environment has increased by orders of magnitude and will increase further with 5G/6G. Current limits were set for a world that no longer exists. The precautionary principle demands we reduce exposure now, while we learn. The burden of proof belongs to the technology, not to the public. Ref: IARC Monograph 102 (2013); NTP TR 595/596 (2018); ICBE-EMF, Environ Health 21:92 (2022); Melnick et al., Environ Health (2026); Lai & Levitt,Rev Environ Health 39(3) (2024);Bandara & Carpenter,Lancet Planetary Health (2018); Council of Europe Res.1815/2011; Rio Declaration Principle 15(1992)

I support HHS's efforts to investigate electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure, including radiofrequency radiation from 5G networks, cell towers, Wi-Fi, and other wireless technologies. However, I am deeply concerned that these technologies have been deployed on such a massive scale without sufficient long-term, independent research demonstrating their safety under real-world conditions. The American public should not be expected to accept widespread, involuntary exposure to these technologies and simply trust that they are safe. The burden of demonstrating safety should fall on the manufacturers, telecommunications companies, and regulatory agencies—not on the public to prove harm after exposure has already occurred. I have several serious questions that deserve transparent, evidence-based answers: What is a safe level of EMF exposure? How were current exposure limits established, and do they adequately account for cumulative exposure over years or decades? How much radiation do 5G towers and other wireless transmitters actually emit? What are the exposure levels in surrounding homes, schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods? Are these levels independently measured and made publicly available? What are the potential long-term health consequences of frequent, close-range exposure? Have we adequately investigated possible effects on neurological function, sleep, reproductive health, cellular processes, and cancer risk? What about children? Children are exposed to wireless technologies from increasingly young ages, including throughout the school day. What independent, long-term studies establish appropriate exposure limits for developing brains and bodies? How is cumulative exposure evaluated? People are surrounded by multiple sources of RF/EMF exposure simultaneously, including cell phones, Wi-Fi routers, Bluetooth devices, smart appliances, and nearby telecommunications infrastructure. Are current safety standards adequately accounting for these combined exposures? Who is conducting the safety research? How much of the available research is independently funded, and how are financial conflicts of interest identified and addressed? Why are technologies permitted to become so widespread before their potential long-term health effects are fully understood? We have seen too many instances in which public health concerns were dismissed or inadequately investigated until years after exposure occurred. I also question whether the public is receiving sufficient information about other technologies involving radiation or electromagnetic exposure, including airport security screening systems. These technologies should be evaluated according to their specific emissions, exposure levels, and potential health effects, with the findings readily accessible to the public. I urge HHS to take the following actions: Commission comprehensive, independent, long-term studies on RF/EMF exposure, including 5G and newer wireless technologies. Reevaluate existing exposure standards, particularly for children, pregnant women, and individuals experiencing continuous exposure. Require greater transparency regarding emissions from telecommunications towers and wireless infrastructure. Investigate the potential effects of chronic, cumulative exposure from multiple devices and sources. Make independent safety research, exposure measurements, and regulatory decision-making publicly accessible. Apply the precautionary principle by considering restrictions or pauses on additional deployments where significant safety questions remain unresolved. I believe the expansion of technologies with unresolved long-term safety questions should be halted until adequate independent safety evaluations have been completed. Public health must take priority over corporate profits, technological convenience, and the speed of infrastructure deployment. The absence of conclusive evidence of harm is not the same as proof of safety. The American people deserve more than reassurances. We deserve transparency, accountability, rigorous independent research, and clear answers about what constitutes safe exposure. I appreciate HHS opening this issue for public comment, but I strongly urge the Department to go beyond collecting information. Meaningful investigation, public disclosure, and appropriate protective action must follow. Our health, and especially the health of our children, should never be treated as an afterthought.

I am submitting this comment in response to the HHS's request for information on EMF's, RF radiation and wireless radiation exposure. All of these things should have been throughly researched before use. People are being exposed to radiation with unknown consequences. Illnesses, migraines, fertility issues, and more devastating issues seem to be caused by this radiation exposure. The health of our citizens should not take a back seat to high speed internet and data centers. You must address the growing concerns and stop exposing the American people to deadly radiation. Thank you.

EMF exposure has affected the health of my family. We used to live 29 feet away from a 5G tower and had a smart meter outside of our bedroom window. Both my husband and I suffered insomnia, headaches, miscarriage, aches and pains, etc., we never felt well rested and had brain fog. Once we moved, our brain fog disappeared, we started sleeping through the night, and we got pregnant!

I am an extremely concerned citizen who has done the research to educate myself on the topic of 5G. I know numerous women and children who have been affected by the radiation coming from small cell towars placed within their neighborhoods, school yards, and offices. I actively avoid businesses with 5G small towers on the building. I do become dizzy, nauseous, and irritable near 5G small cell and cell towers. I am concerned for my future children as 5G is scientifically proven to impact male gametes. 5G towers were constructed without the public's knowledge, approval, or consideration. The negative health effects are proving detrimental. It is time to remove 5G cells from our homes, jobs, and community.