Reproduction & pregnancy

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.

Hello! I am sharing my story regarding the potential health effects of EMFs. My daughter was born in 2014 with a finger deformity — her thumb was split into two malformed parts, meaning she had six fingers on her left hand. At home, I kept the Wi-Fi router under the computer desk next to the sofa, and my usual spot was on the sofa right beside the router. I wasn't aware of the harmful effects of EMFs back then, but looking back now, I am quite certain that this was the cause of the deformity because I often sat right there on the sofa next to the router, reading books or watching TV. Otherwise, my daughter is a healthy and capable child; she plays sports and does well in school. I am also sharing a photo of her hand. In my opinion, there are far more malformation of digits among younger generations than there used to be. I have seen deformed fingers on several acquaintances. Personally, it seems to me that the incidence of these deformities has risen significantly, as they are increasingly visible in public settings, such as playgrounds, shops, and kindergartens.

RRM Foundation (RRM Academy, rrmacademy.org) submits the attached comment on the Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields, Radiofrequency Radiation and Wireless Radiation Exposure. We recommend that HHS treat male fertility as a priority research gap (Questions 16 and 18), include menstrual cycle and ovulation endpoints in long-term cohort studies (Question 10(d)), and recognize couples seeking pregnancy as a distinct population with exposure measured in both partners (Question 11(g)). Supporting references and further reading are in the attached letter.

Submission to Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397: Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields, Radiofrequency Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure Submitted by: Dr Nicole Bijlsma, PhD, Environmental-Health Educator and Researcher, Melbourne, Australia I am writing as a researcher, educator and practitioner who has spent the past 25 years assessing homes for environmental-health hazards. I have also been personally affected by EMF exposure. I developed persistent sleep problems within 2 weeks of moving into our first home. I eventually realised (after 7 years and ten miscarriages - no explanation was provided by the medical industry and we didnt qualify for IVF), we were sleeping adjacent to the meter panel. I purchased a triple axis digital gauss meter and found elevated AC magnetic fields on the bed during the early hours of the morning (when the hot water system was in use). We consequently relocated to another bedroom - sleep improved and I successfully carried a twin pregnancy to term. The fix was simple and cost nothing. I subsequently established the Australian College of Environmental Studies in 1999, and have spent the past 25 years teaching students how to undertake home assessments for mould, electromagnetic fields, allergens and toxicants. Poor sleep is one of the most common complaints I see where EMF exposure is a factor. The two sources I find most often are: radiofrequency radiation from Wi-Fi routers and wireless-enabled devices kept in or near bedrooms, often running all night; and AC magnetic fields from meter panels, switchboards and wiring, including where smart meters are installed on the other side of a bedroom wall. Reducing exposure in the bedroom is frequently followed by reports of better sleep. Typical steps are moving the bed, switching off Wi-Fi at night and using wired connections. I subsequently undertook a PhD in environmental medicine (RMIT) examining the impact of environmental exposures to toxicants and manmade electromagnetic fields, gaps in current exposure standards, and the associated health effects. My dissertation, which asks whether radiofrequency radiation affects sleep, is attached in support of this submission. This involved the first real-world study (double blind, randomised, placebo controlled pilot study) on the impact of a Wi-Fi enabled device on sleep in healthy adults using a baby monitor which was statistically significant (within 7 days). Current exposure standards are designed to prevent short-term heating and nerve stimulation which do not reflect real-world exposure. They do not adequately address chronic, low-level, night-time exposure in the home, which is when the body should be resting and repairing. Nor do they account for vulnerable groups such as children, or those impacted by mould who frequently become sensitive to manmade electromagnetic fields and toxicants. Recommendations Remarkably, the most effective measures are simple and cheap: Design-stage solutions. Building codes and planning guidance should require meter panels, switchboards and smart meters to be located away from bedrooms and living areas. They should also encourage hard-wired data connections in new homes. These measures cost almost nothing when planned in at the design stage, but are expensive to retrofit. Mass consumer education. The public needs clear, independent and practical guidance on reducing exposure, particularly while sleeping. This includes turning off Wi-Fi at night, keeping devices out of bedrooms and checking what is behind the bedhead. A precautionary approach. Exposures should be kept as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), and research and surveillance on sleep and other non-thermal effects should be funded. These recommendations are consistent with the Australian Senate Inquiry into Electromagnetic Radiation (2001) (attached). The Chair's report called for a rigorous precautionary approach to wireless technology, for emissions to be kept as low as reasonably achievable, and for clear, independent public information so people can make informed choices. Twenty-five years on, those recommendations are more relevant than ever. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute.

In 2000 I started my first job working for a cell phone tower company in the Northern Virginia area. The purpose of our department was the collocation of cell towers internationally, and I was working in Business Development. Our Director of Engineering, who was one of the most intelligent people I have ever met, refused to carry a cell phone. He would say, "I know too much". When he would travel overseas, we would have to set up times to call him on a land line. He was the first person to ever openly tell me about the dangers of the radiation emitted from these devices and most importantly, the cells on the towers. We had to take a radiation awareness class to understand more about the cells and what our engineers and operators would be exposed to while setting these up. The class was overwhelmingly terrifying. Two of the operators said that since they had been setting up these towers, they were now sterile and were having many uncomfortable symptoms. They had never been told that this could be a consequence of their work. This class we set up after the fact. We were told in this class that no one should ever been within 100 feet of a cell town for more than 10 minutes at a time. Operators had to rotate while installation and had max times next to the towers. The radiation would cause permanent damage. This changed my life. Since that day I am very conscious about the locations of towers to my home, office, schools, etc. I have cancelled appointments, hotel rooms, etc because of the cells location on roof tops. It makes my stomach sick when I see cell towers constructed right next to people's homes and all over city rooftops and even churches and schools. The money that is offered to these people so they will have these on their land sometimes is just too good for them to resist. But, who is taking these awareness classes on the radiation now? No one. At least not that I am aware of. The damage is done and now it's emitting from even more devices than ever before.

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 a parent, caregiver, advocate, concerned member of the public. The potential health effects of long-term exposure to wireless radiation deserve continued, independent, and comprehensive scientific research. As wireless technologies—including cell phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth devices, smartwatches, and other connected technologies—have become increasingly integrated into everyday life, people are being exposed to radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) for longer periods and across multiple sources, often unaware of these exposures.There is currently no research that establishes whether typical wireless exposure causes specific health conditions. Therefore, questions remain about the potential effects of chronic, cumulative, and long-term exposure, particularly at lower intensities and among children and other potentially vulnerable populations. Research should therefore examine not only short-term effects but also long-term biological impacts, including possible effects on sleep, neurological function, reproductive health, cellular processes, and overall well-being. Independent research free from industry influence is especially important so that public health recommendations and safety standards are based on the strongest available evidence and can be updated as technology and scientific understanding evolve.

I am concerned about the wireless non-ionizing radiation to which we are exposed 24 hours a day. This short-wave radiation is dangerous not only to our health, but to the health of almost all living organisms. We have not evolved to tolerate such an attack of these short-wave lengths on our bodies. The ill-effects of such exposure have been documented. They range from headaches, dizziness, sleeplessness, body aches and pains, mental distress, cancer and sometimes fatal reactions. Wildlife experience similar effects from bees and invertebates to vertebrates. The expansion of these cell towers and antennas makes it almost impossible to shield oneself from their damaging and dangerous effect. People have to abandon their homes, which cannot sold. Farm animals get very sick as well as wildlife. What is terrifying is the expansion to 6G. Children are even more vulnerable to the dangerous effects. What is the effect on a developing fetus? It is urgent that we have complete information on electromagnetic Fields, Radiofrequency, and Wireless Radiation. The 1996 legislation gave this industry indemnity from lawsuits. They cannot be sued for the harm they do. That inability to sue needs to be changed. The power to regulate this industry needs to be given to HHS and removed from FCC. They have proven themselves to be irresponsible and dangerous. We can switch to fiber optics and safer technologies. I appreciate your concern for our well-being and for the well-being of all life. We cannot survive without a working ecology.

Question Numbers: 3, 18 September 30, 2026 The EMP Victims collective – Victims of Electromagnetic Pollution – has been giving a voice for nearly two years to those who suffer from EMR Syndrome. We launched an international appeal, “EMR-S (EHS) Is a Humanitarian Emergency,” on February 14, 2024. Today, our website, www.empvictims.org, brings together: - More than 4,600 messages from signatories to our Appeal, reporting electromagnetic suffering around the world; - A series of video testimonials documenting lives shattered by mobile phone masts, mobile phones, Wi-Fi routers, smart meters and other wireless devices communicating through radio frequencies, as well as by electrical and magnetic pollution, and also the indifference, or even denial, surrounding this suffering. People affected by EMR-S syndrome are environmental sentinels who alert us to the biological effects of EMFs and to the immediate and imperative need for zons free from wireless radiation for those who are most severely affected. We are also calling for a radical change in standards in order to protect those who are not yet suffering, particularly children and pregnant women, who are among the most vulnerable Our Appeal has been received by institutional officials who refuse to take into account the health and environmental consequences of the exponential increase in levels of artificial EMFs. We support Robert F. Kennedy Jr., U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, in the hope that the toxicity of electromagnetic radiation will finally be recognized and that each state will take the necessary measures to protect its population. (Attached are the appeal, the 4,653 messages submitted by signatories as of 30 September 2026, and the European Commission’s response.)

Hello! I am 49 year old female living with my family. My parents and sister and her son. I have been targeted with electromagnetic fields and frequencies for a lifetime but intensely 2019. Non stop. High amounts of heat, tissue swelling, pain, blisters, rashes, hair problems, numbness, tingling, pain in joints, pain in bones, pain in teeth bones, loss of enamel in teeth, loss of vision, blurry vision, eye blisters, ear pain, pain to head and temples, Tissue damages, skin damage, It can cause taste and all 5 senses changes. Follicle changes skin pores opening. Excess oils ,vision loss, distortion of time, vomiting, pain sensations, dryness of skin, oils in skin, loss of equilibrium, surface of eyes to tear or leave marks , harden cartilage, blood sugar changes, fainting, dizziness, loss of coordination, joint swelling, edema. Victims of crime are having this used on their families by terrorists and being turned to crisis centers for mental health when these are in fact injuries that are near impossible to detect or have similar symptoms of flu, dehydration. Can be mistaken for symptoms of cancer, autism, exhaustion, can cause anxiety disorders, hyperventilation, redness in face, death in children fetus or babies. Upper respiratory infections other infections , metabolic issues, changes in forehead nose eyes ears throat. I pray that this issue is addressed as I have been a victim of assault by these very things. It’s hard to talk to people about it because they don’t see it. I hope public is informed more thoroughly about this and that there are medications available for these symptoms. Vagus nerve and nerve damages. The list goes on forever. Broken bones ,