Reproduction & pregnancy

I am submitting this comment to express my serious concern about the potential health effects of electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure, particularly for children, pregnant women, and future generations. We live in an increasingly connected world in which people are exposed to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from cell phones, wireless devices, Wi-Fi networks, cell towers, and other wireless technologies. Children are growing up surrounded by these technologies and may experience exposure throughout their lives, beginning during pregnancy and continuing through childhood and adolescence. Given this increasing and prolonged exposure, I believe it is essential that the federal government carefully examine the potential short-term and long-term health consequences. **A particular concern is the potential relationship between EMF exposure and cancer.** The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization, classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B) in 2011. This classification does not establish that exposure causes cancer, but it does indicate that the scientific evidence warranted concern and further investigation. Research examining possible associations between radiofrequency exposure and brain tumors and other cancers deserves continued, independent scrutiny. I am especially concerned about children because their bodies and brains are still developing, and their lifetime exposure may be substantially longer than that of previous generations. It is important to determine whether existing exposure standards adequately account for children's developmental stages, potential differences in vulnerability, and the cumulative effects of exposure over many decades. The absence of conclusive evidence of harm should not be interpreted as definitive proof that all potential long-term risks have been ruled out. I respectfully urge the federal government to take the following actions: 1. **Conduct and support independent, long-term research** into possible associations between EMF exposure and cancer, neurological development, reproductive health, sleep, and other relevant health outcomes. 2. **Give special attention to children and pregnancy**, including studies that examine prenatal exposure, childhood exposure, and potential effects over the course of a person's lifetime. 3. **Reassess existing exposure standards** in light of the latest scientific evidence, including whether those standards adequately address prolonged exposure, real-world exposure patterns, and potentially vulnerable populations. 4. **Ensure transparency and independence in scientific reviews**, including disclosure of funding sources, conflicts of interest, research limitations, and disagreements among qualified researchers. 5. **Provide clear, accessible public information** about what is known, what remains uncertain, and what practical measures individuals and families can take to reduce unnecessary exposure if they choose to do so. 6. **Apply a prudent, precautionary approach** while scientific uncertainties remain, particularly when considering children and other potentially vulnerable populations. Reasonable exposure-reduction measures should be considered where feasible without overstating what the evidence establishes. I recognize that wireless technologies provide significant benefits and that scientific research has not established that ordinary environmental EMF exposure causes every health condition of concern. Nevertheless, the widespread and increasing use of these technologies makes it especially important to investigate potential risks rigorously, independently, and continuously. Protecting public health requires more than waiting for absolute scientific certainty before investigating a possible risk. It requires a commitment to transparent research, careful evaluation of emerging evidence, and appropriate safeguards when the health of children and future generations may be at stake. I urge the relevant federal agencies to give this issue serious consideration, ensure that the scientific evidence is evaluated comprehensively, and prioritize the long-term health and well-being of the public. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this comment and for considering these concerns. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC): The 2011 classification of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). This is a hazard classification, not a conclusion that everyday exposure necessarily causes cancer. National Cancer Institute: Its overview of cell phones and cancer discusses epidemiological research, biological evidence, and the limitations of existing studies. World Health Organization (WHO): Its research on radiofrequency electromagnetic fields addresses the evidence on possible health effects and the need for continued evaluation.

With the proliferation of cell phone towers, smart meters, smart home devices, data centers and wireless devices in our environment, additional research needs to be conducted on the harmful effects of wi-fi, RF and EMF. As a concerned family member and caregiver, I believe human health experiences and clinical observations need to be taken into account. Exposure standards need to be reevaluated to limit human and animal exposure to wireless radiation and electromagnetic fields. Exposure measurement needs to be reevaluated in real-world situations, as humans use their cell phones by directly touching them and are often exposed to multiple sources of wi-fi simultaneously. Sensitive populations exposed to wi-fi, RF and EMF need to be studied such as children, pregnant women, the elderly, those who wear hearing aids with wi-fi or blue-tooth, those with implanted or wearable devices, workers with elevated exposure and those with preexisting conditions. It is imperative that existing scientific evidence be examined and additional research be conducted to study the adverse health effects of wi-fi, RF and EMF on humans and our environment. Please see attached studies. Thank you.

I am a mother submitting this comment in response to HHS's Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am writing as a parent and consumer. Below I describe what my husband and I have experienced: the exposure, the symptoms, what we changed, and what happened. I cannot prove cause, but the pattern is consistent. We should not have to guess whether any of these are connected. It is also worth stating that I founded a company that makes EMF-shielding apparel for women, which I started because of my experiences below. My exposure: In 2020, when I started working from home during the pandemic, I suddenly spent hours a day with a wireless laptop on my lap and my phone within reach. Symptoms: Within months, I developed tingling and numbness in my face and lips, joint pain that radiated up my arms, trouble concentrating, impaired memory, severe panic attacks, and poor sleep. My general practitioner listened to my symptoms and recommended antidepressants. When the pain in my hands became unbearable, I saw a rheumatologist for testing. She didn't find arthritis but offered to prescribe painkillers, which I declined. What I changed: I took the laptop off my lap, wired my computer and TV, kept my phone off my body and out of reach, used airplane mode often, turned off Bluetooth and WiFi on devices that didn't need them, and turned off the WiFi router at night. Result: My symptoms eased to a manageable level. They return when I hold a Bluetooth device against my body and when I spend time in high-EMF environments, like airports and homes run by smart home systems. My exposure: Driving and riding in our two 2026 hybrids, an SUV and a crossover. Symptoms: Immediately, I experience severe aching and burning in my hands and feet, nausea, fatigue, intermittent shooting pains in my abdomen and chest, and a short-circuiting feeling in my brain when I try to finish a sentence. What I changed: I drive as little as possible and rent a gas-powered car for any drive longer than 20 minutes. After parking, I ground myself as soon as I can. Result: My symptoms fade slowly after I turn off the car and get out, and they ease noticeably faster when I ground. My husband’s exposure: Sleeping with wireless earbuds in. Symptom: A lump about the size of a dime under his ear. What he changed: He stopped wearing earbuds to bed. Result: The lump went away. I support HHS examining the health impact of wireless radiation, and ask that HHS treat children and pregnant women as distinct populations in its research priorities. Research priorities include long-term studies of children exposed from birth; pregnancy and reproductive outcomes; the health effects of cell towers near homes and schools, and how that evidence should guide where towers are allowed; exposure in schools and vehicles; and the effects of 5G and 6G on our health and the environment. The experiences of individuals and families who report being affected by, or who are concerned about, potential health effects from EMF, RF, and wireless radiation exposure should be considered alongside the scientific evidence, to help identify gaps in current research and to establish appropriate safety parameters for wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for including individuals and families in your request for information.

I am a 64-year-old man whose family owns a vacation home in Hillman Township, Michigan. A cell tower developer is seeking to construct a massive telecommunications tower just feet from my property. Like others who live nearby, we purchased and maintained this home to enjoy peace, privacy, and the natural environment -- not to face the prospect of significant, long-term exposure to high levels of wireless radiation emissions. This is not a matter of NIMBY-ism. This is a matter of public health and the responsible, thoughtful sitting of powerful industrial equipment. I urge HHS to prioritize research into the biological mechanisms of harm. Federal research should investigate the effects of RF radiation on cellular signaling, oxidative stress, DNA damage and repair, neurological function, and reproductive and developmental health. HHS should fund independent, replicated laboratory studies, long-term animal research, and prospective human studies examining chronic and cumulative exposure, including levels below current federal limits. Research should also examine particularly vulnerable populations, including children, pregnant women, and older adults. According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer's 2013 Monograph Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation, children absorb up to ten times more wireless radiation in the bone marrow of the skull compared to adults due to their thinner skulls, smaller heads, and higher brain conductivity. I urge HHS to recommend that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) reassesses and lowers its existing RF exposure limits. Current RF exposure limits are so permissive that they’re essentially the equivalent of a 500-mph speed limit. No wonder people are getting sick! The FCC must reconsider the Specific Anthropomorphic Mannequin (SAM) model used to assess cell phone RF exposure. SAM is based on a simplified model of a standardized adult head and was developed to assess localized RF energy absorption under specified testing conditions. It does not adequately represent the full range of human anatomy, including children, differences in head and body size, or the complexity of real-world phone use and exposure. A compliance test based on a standardized model cannot, by itself, establish that all users are adequately protected under all realistic conditions. HHS should encourage independent evaluation of SAM's limitations and support improved testing methods that better reflect diverse users, realistic usage patterns, and modern wireless devices. I am not opposed to telecommunications technology. I am asking that public health receive the same serious consideration as infrastructure expansion. I respectfully urge HHS to lead a coordinated federal research effort, further investigate the biological mechanisms of RF-related harms, recommend stronger FCC exposure limits, and support more scientifically representative cell phone testing methods. Americans deserve nothing less. Thank you for your consideration of my comment. Respectfully submitted, Chris Caswell

Independent research (not funded by telecommunications companies) has shown a clear link between RF radiation and serious health issues in children, adults and flora/fauna. The HHS should follow the guidelines of BioInitiative Report 2012 unless clear scientific evidence shows that a different level of rf exposure is safe. Below are the links to research documenting the need for stronger limits on rf exposure: Exposure limits to radiofrequency EMF do not account for cancer risk or reproductive toxicity assessed from data in experimental animals | Environmental Health | Springer Nature Link Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G | Environmental Health | Springer Nature Link Cellular and molecular effects of non-ionizing electromag... The roles of intensity, exposure duration, and modulation on the biological effects of radiofrequency radiation and exposure guidelines: Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine: Vol 41 , No 2 - Get Access Genetic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields: Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine: Vol 40 , No 2 - Get Access

I have already had to move 3 times due to radiowave sickness. Once from Riversode, CA in 2020 and again from Somis, CA (southern California which is extremely cell tower). I moved to a rural portion of Northern California, Grass Valley, and again I am being threatened by the proposed cell tower on Dog Bar Rd that is currently being fought in federal court. Under the current rules, the county has no ability to object to cell towers. Guidelines which were set in the 1990s. Remember what the phones looked like in the 90s with the antennas and no internet? Those guidelines are as antiquated as those phones. When I had to return to Southern California for a couple of weeks, I had a rash on my entire upper body from radiofrequency exposure. I also get headaches and chest pain. Also, the microwave radiation penetrates much further into children's skulls that adult's skulls. In other areas of life, we set the exposure limits at a level that will protect pregnant women and children. Why should this be any different? China requires pregnant women to wear radiofrequency shielding belly bands and Russia has limits on how much minors should use cell phones daily. What is that saying when Russia and China care more about protecting their citizens than we do?

October 21, 2026 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’m an experienced health information management professional – a certified clinical coding specialist and medical transcriptionist – and a parent of two young children, and I have grave concerns about the harmful health effects of compulsory and/or undisclosed microwave radiation exposure on a largely uninformed, un-consenting, and unprotected population of United States citizens. With more and more biologically hazardous cell towers, small cell equipment, and smart meters being forced on United States citizens (often against their wishes) and with public schools now enforcing the use of wireless devices in every classroom, and the daily, up-close, compulsory exposure of vulnerable schoolchildren to wireless infrastructure (“WiFi”) health risks all day while held in captivity by order of the state; soon there may be no place left for anyone to hide from the dangerous cumulative effects of so many unchecked layers of microwave radiation. Without the benefit of appropriately serious health warnings provided by the government institutions we trust to protect our citizens, most people don’t even question the safety of wireless devices at all! How many of you know of a teenager who sleeps with a cell phone on her pillow, resting directly against her brain all night long? How many times have you seen a drooling baby in the shopping cart, keeping quiet with a tablet’s microwave radiation warming his private parts - or teething with A CELL PHONE IN HIS MOUTH? I once witnessed every single pregnant woman in the waiting room at my OB/GYN doctor’s passing the time innocently holding a cell phone pulsing with invisible radiation directly over her pregnant belly - likely without any clue she is causing harmful microwaves to penetrate the delicate cells and organs of her precious baby developing inside. One of these mothers-to-be stood up when called and placed the biologically interactive cell phone inside the belly pocket of her hoodie, pressed right up against her baby growing inside. The woman sitting next to me was nursing a tiny new baby, while casually scrolling on a cell phone that was resting directly on her infant’s head! Most often when I speak up, these uninformed mothers tell me they had no idea there was any harmful “radiation” coming out of their wireless device, and they thank me for telling them. WHY ARE THERE NO CLEAR AND OBVIOUS HEALTH WARNINGS BEING ISSUED BY THE COMPANIES THAT SELL THESE DEVICES, OR FROM AGENCIES ENTRUSTED TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH?” Sadly, my experience is that school administrators, teachers, parents, and people in general are typically not even aware that “WiFi” is microwave radiation! Well-meaning people in charge of keeping schools, hospitals, office buildings, and other spaces safe - who make crucial decisions that affect people’s safety, on behalf of the public, all seem to be under a false impression that the science is settled, and that “WiFi” (whatever that means) is a completely harmless, unquestionably safe, and necessary part of life now. Meanwhile citizens are being forced and coerced into absorbing wifi radiation from “mandatory” smart meters in their own homes, and now even wired landline phone connections are being phased out in favor of wireless tech – leaving those of us who are concerned about the known health risks from wireless radiation becoming more and more terrorized by the prospect of a future where there is nowhere left to hide from the EMF, RF, and Wireless Radiation exposures being forced upon us. (….continued in Comment to HHS Part 2)

(….continued from previous Comment, this is Comment to HHS Part 2) The American Academy of Pediatrics advises parents to “limit children’s screen time and exposure from cell phones and other devices emitting radiation from electromagnetic fields (EMF)”, but teachers in our town have sent home papers assigning the children to spend more time practicing on their wireless devices at home, to better their skills for testing time. There are hazardous wireless routers emitting radiation in every classroom, but most teachers are not even aware that they shouldn’t stand directly under a wireless router all day, or place an unsuspecting child’s desk directly beside a wireless router for him to absorb maximum radiation exposure every day while attending school. In meetings with school principals, superintendents, teachers, and the school committee in our town, our family asked them to bring in just one local medical professional willing to attest to the safety of a wireless learning environment for children. They reported back that they did reach out to some local doctors, but none of the doctors who responded were willing to make such a statement on the record. One of the doctors reportedly said to our school Principal, off the record, “I’m not attesting to that. Everyone knows you’re supposed to limit your exposure to radiation.” Even still, in our town’s public schools there is no informed consent notice to be signed, disclosing to parents that their children will be exposed to constant microwave radiation while attending school. When I tell other parents about it, it makes them feel sick - and foolish that they’ve been left unprotected and unaware of such a major cause for concern about health risks present in their children’s learning environment. Most the educators we met with uncomfortably agreed that there is definitely cause for concern regarding wireless radiation exposure in the schools, but they’ve made no effort to stop the massive rollout of wireless tech – and instead offered us the option to home school our kids as the only way to avoid the serious health risks of cumulative daily radiation exposure at school. I feel strongly that mandatory radiation exposure is not an acceptable requirement for students attending public school! According to Harvard Medical School/Mass General Hospital’s Martha R. Herbert, Ph.D., M.D., “Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation from WiFi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function. This will make it harder for some children to learn, particularly those who are already having learning or medical problems in the first place.” Knowing the terrible risks associated with EMFs, RF, and wireless radiation - from brain cancer to infertility to depression, insomnia, addiction, and much more - our family made the difficult decision to protect our children and home school them at our own expense, but this is not an option for most working families, who all deserve the right to opt out of unwanted radiation exposure - and at least deserve to be protected and informed by responsible authorities on how to minimize risk. 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. Sincerely, A Concerned U.S. Citizen and Mother of Two

[Part 1] Subject: Field reality and health emergency Members of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), I have great admiration for your work and for everything you undertake for our well-being. • Original background: I was previously an audiovisual professional in Paris, and also an importer and distributor of connected devices with a small number of resellers. • Onset: I was forced to abandon Paris after developing a violent intolerance to electromagnetic radiation, both in low and high frequencies. I found myself having to sleep in my car, in the forest, and then in a barn without electricity that was lent to me for 10 months. • Direct cause of the condition: This condition was triggered by extreme and continuous personal exposure: an internet router installed directly in my bedroom and, starting out in financial trading, a smartphone turned on permanently in my hand (on filming sets, at home, and during all my round trips). • Professional retraining and market cleanup: Faced with this ordeal, I redirected my activity toward diagnosis and protection against radiofrequencies (RF) and electromagnetic radiation (EMR). I did it first for myself, because I wanted to regain an almost normal life. Then I realized that people needed it. I created a specialized platform to eliminate fraudulent devices that saturate the market and to offer only genuine mitigation and shielding solutions, rigorously validated by testing and now years of practical feedback. There are many scams in the field of RF / EMF protection. People buy things that do not work. That is why they continue to feel the radiofrequencies and do not improve. Every person I equip and follow improves and recovers their health. • Profiles supported and medical censorship: Today, I support and protect a very large number of profiles: teachers, lawyers, as well as healthcare professionals. The latter are forced to protect themselves in the most absolute secrecy, terrified by the risk of disciplinary action or permanent disbarment from the Medical Board if they dare to address the health impact of waves with their patients. • Concrete results on people's lives: Thanks to the physical shielding and adaptations that I design, individuals, including healthcare professionals, can continue to practice safely. For others, it is a matter of pure survival: people who depended entirely on relatives for supplies can finally go out on their own to buy their food. Also people who were in burnout. I was able to adapt their living spaces so that they regained exceptional health. Some were able to start working again thanks to adaptations made in their workplace. When electromagnetic pollution is removed from the workplace, they can finally work again. • Critical condition of the population and children: I have supported hundreds of people. Some affected individuals are in lamentable physical conditions and states of distress because of radiofrequencies. Children today are subjected to totally unacceptable power levels. Within less than five years (and warning signs are already exploding), a massive segment of the population will find itself incapacitated and in need of heavy medical care. • Field observations in children: During my on-site assessments, the contrast is undeniable: children kept away from radiofrequencies are almost always in perfect health, whereas exposed children develop behavioral disorders or develop developmental delays. We know that waves induce a depressive state. What are we going to do with these tens of millions of adolescents injured by radiation? • Observations on prenatal exposure: Women who kept an active mobile phone less than 10 cm from their fetus during pregnancy almost systematically give birth to children suffering from behavioral disorders, developmental delays, or autism spectrum disorders. • Call for absolute emergency: If we persist with such radiation powers, we are heading straight toward disaster. Frankness is required: it is almost already too late for present generations, and for future generations. The HHS must act without delay, massively, and with the utmost firmness. 3 a. Wireless router, Mobile phone, magnetic, smart meter, Electric field. 3 b. I began exposing myself heavily in 2012. To all the objects mentioned above. Exposed almost permanently. Since we have our mobile phones during the day, and at night, we have internet routers close to us.

'Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.' https://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal