Reproduction & pregnancy

[Part 2] 3 c. Potential adverse health effects. My legs could no longer support me. I had bouts of tachycardia and bouts of bradycardia. I had severe insomnia. I was convulsing, and I fell to the ground as soon as I turned on a mobile phone or a touchscreen tablet. On public transport, I was sweating, I was the only one unable to tolerate the ambient temperature. It was as if my body was overheating. I had to leave for work with a backpack that I filled with ice cubes, in an attempt to cool myself down. Before going on stage, at the theater, I was totally exhausted, and I had to lie down backstage between every appearance. I could no longer sleep in my home. I would take my car to go sleep in the forest. I was very irritable, almost aggressive. 3 d. After the beginning of my heavy exposure, symptoms appeared two years later. Before starting to trade on financial markets and having to follow market quotes almost day and night, I had no symptoms. And when I started holding 1 mobile phone in my hand permanently, having to turn on my computer on Wi-Fi next to the bed, and putting an internet router in my bedroom. 2 years later, the symptoms appeared. 3 e. Medical treatments yielded absolutely nothing. 3 f. I searched on the Internet why I could no longer eat with metal cutlery. On forums, I found a lead regarding radiofrequency intolerance, since electromagnetic fields and especially radio settle on anything made of metal. Moreover, with some detectors I now own, when I bring the detector close to a metal piece of cutlery, we see the irradiance increase sharply, and sometimes we can even pick up the radio station by placing the detector almost against the metal piece of cutlery. I could therefore eat with plastic or wooden cutlery, but metal made my hands tingle. These were tinglings that could turn into pain if I persisted in wanting to eat with metal cutlery. I therefore left Paris and went to the countryside. I could see that when there was no low- or high-frequency electromagnetic radiation, I was completely fine, I had great energy. And my voice was clear. Whereas when I was in the presence of magnetic fields, electric fields, or radiofrequencies, I lost my voice. I could barely speak anymore, no sound came out of my mouth, I was totally exhausted. My voice sounded as if I were 85 years old. 3 g. RF: From my personal experience, as well as my experience with the people I follow. I can certify that numerous effects appear starting at 100 μW/m2 (approximately 0.20 V/m), i.e., 0.01 μW/cm2. This irradiance should under no circumstances be exceeded inside homes or places of study, of work, or even lower for places accommodating children, in order to maintain optimal health. I assert from my personal experience and the many people I follow and support, that we should under no circumstances be able to exceed 1000 μW/m2 in public spaces (approximately 0.60 V/m), i.e., 0.1 μW/cm2. For people who are now sensitized, who have been subjected to strong radiofrequencies, their situation is becoming very alarming, because these are people who cannot be exposed to more than 10 μW/m2 (approximately 0.06 V/m), i.e., 0.001 μW/cm2. There are the most extreme cases who were very heavily exposed and who can no longer be exposed to more than 1 μW/m2 (approximately 0.02 V/m), i.e., 0.0001 μW/cm2. The day these people need medical care and are transported to hospitals. Unfortunately, their pain is such that they scream in agony and end up most of the time in psychiatry. Currently, in France, no hospital is equipped to receive radiation victims who need to be accommodated under proper conditions, free from electromagnetic radiation. Electric field: I must be at less than 1 V/m in electric fields; beyond that, my symptoms return. Magnetic: I can hardly expose myself to more than 100 nanoTesla. Beyond 200 nanoTesla, I experience effects: headaches and nosebleeds if the exposure is too prolonged, and difficulty falling asleep. It is imperative to raise awareness among people about the dangers of low- and high-frequency electromagnetic fields. It is important to disseminate how to achieve electromagnetic sobriety. It is important to spread the message that many daily symptoms can be eliminated, such as fatigue, exhaustion, headaches, insomnia… thanks to electromagnetic sobriety. It is imperative to do this, even through television commercials, to show that a pregnant woman must not carry a mobile phone close to her belly. Booklets must be published and distributed in pharmacies and doctors' offices.

[Part 3] 10 d. Longitudinal cohort studies. It is urgent to conduct national studies to collect testimonies from parents of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder or children with neurodegenerative disorders (NDD). Testimonies must be gathered indicating whether the mother was using a mobile phone during pregnancy. Inquire whether children, from their youngest age, used a mobile phone. The difference will be striking between children who were fortunate enough to develop without radiation and the others. These are quick studies to conduct, requiring no large investment, neither in time nor in money. In addition to solid scientific studies, we will rapidly obtain a significant cohort of responses corroborating the thesis of injuries linked to radiofrequencies. 10 f. Adverse event reporting. It is important to start raising awareness and disseminating information among doctors as quickly as possible. Because currently they are completely unaware of the symptoms and effects that radiation can induce, particularly radiofrequencies, which induce: depression and suicidal impulses. If this is not done quickly, we are heading straight toward a societal catastrophe.

For decades till now I've been a targetted individual, but since 2018 the targetting got painful due to an unconsented poison attack by islam extremists & 5G. Terrorists target me & my family with Palantir neuro weapons appliences, using EMF, RADAR, SONAR RF, nano plasma, LRAD's, DEW, WBAN/web3 biometrical interfaces. I'm being tortured till injured, causing heart attacks, strokes, losing consciousness, paralysis. They (by DEW) shoot and cut the inside of my brains, ears, joints, heart, lungs, reproductive organs and all organs. They aborted embryo's from a distance. The neuro weapons also burn my skin, leaving burn marks, scars and cuts until it bleeds. The V2K/RADAR/SONAR bash my head with low frequency infra sound that only I can hear. The islamo extremists and corrupt officials hack and steal our data & traffick it, they traffick humans, kids and do morbid trade. These extremists also do gangstalking 24/7 survellance. I cannot function. I'm a Govs whistleblower. I try to include a video of plasma they insert in my body by shooting nuclear particles.

1. Perspective represented I am submitting this response in my personal capacity as an individual consumer and as a person who considers themselves affected by exposure to electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation. I live in France and am therefore providing an international perspective. Although this Request for Information is primarily directed toward the United States, the experiences of people who report being affected by electromagnetic fields are not confined to one country. I therefore believe that international personal testimonies may also contribute useful information to this consultation. I am participating in order to share my experience and concerns and to contribute to a broader understanding of the issues reported by individuals in their daily lives. 2. My comments represent the perspective of an individual consumer with personal concerns regarding exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. I am responding in my personal capacity and not on behalf of any organization. 3. Personal experience regarding potential adverse health effects associated with RF/EMF exposure I am submitting this response based on my personal experience. I have experienced a number of health problems that I believe may be associated with exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF/EMFs), particularly during or following periods of exposure to electronic and wireless devices. The health effects I have experienced include: genital pain; fertility problems; abdominal pain; pain in the kidney area; rapid onset of fatigue when working in front of a computer screen; significant intestinal discomfort and inflammation; excessive intestinal gas and bloating; diarrhea. These symptoms have had a tangible impact on my daily life. In particular, I notice that I can become fatigued very quickly when I remain in front of a computer screen. I am sharing these observations as my personal experience. I believe that such individual testimonies should be considered alongside scientific and medical evidence when assessing the potential health effects of RF/EMF exposure. I am submitting this testimony from France. I believe it is important for this consultation to take into consideration that people outside the United States also report health concerns that they associate with exposure to electromagnetic fields. The RF/EMF sources involved in my experience include Wi-Fi, mobile phones and mobile network signals, Bluetooth, and other wireless devices. I also experience rapid fatigue during prolonged computer use, although I cannot determine whether this particular symptom is related to RF/EMF exposure or to another aspect of computer use. My exposure to RF/EMFs occurs mainly in my daily environment through Wi-Fi, mobile phones, mobile network signals, computers connected to wireless networks, Bluetooth, and other wireless devices. These exposures occur regularly in everyday life, particularly when I use a computer or other connected devices. I have noticed that prolonged computer use is associated, in my experience, with a rapid onset of fatigue. The duration and intensity of exposure vary depending on the situation and the devices being used. Because RF/EMF sources are frequently present in my daily environment, it is difficult for me to precisely quantify my cumulative exposure. I am reporting these circumstances based on my personal observations and do not claim that I can independently determine the precise level of RF/EMF exposure. The potential adverse health effects I have personally experienced include: genital pain; fertility problems; abdominal pain; pain in the kidney area; intestinal inflammation and digestive discomfort; excessive intestinal gas and bloating; diarrhea; rapid onset of fatigue, particularly during prolonged computer use. These symptoms vary in nature and intensity. I am reporting them as health effects that I have personally experienced and that I believe may be associated with my exposure to RF/EMFs. I am not claiming that I can independently establish a medical causal relationship between RF/EMF exposure and each of these symptoms. I have noticed that certain symptoms can appear during the use of a mobile phone or laptop computer. In particular, I experience genital pain and abdominal pain while using these devices. I have also experienced increased intestinal gas (flatulence) and bloating during periods of use. These observations have led me to suspect a possible association between these symptoms and my exposure during the use of these devices. I am reporting this as my personal experience and observation, and I am not claiming that I can independently establish a medical causal relationship between RF/EMF exposure and these symptoms. I sought medical evaluation for some of the health problems described in this response. Biological laboratory testing identified a medical condition that could account

Please look at the low dose EMF rat studies (continuous low dose EMF's, like what humans are exposed to, over two years) that Dr. Paul Heroux carried out at McGill University in Canada. What happens in a rat, happens in a human! Deleterious results to the cornea, testicles and heart were evident in the rats. The FCC only used hours long, high doses of EMF's that caused burning, but never published studies with low dose EMF's done over months or years. Don't ignore the studies that show negative effects from EMF's. Last exposure limits update with the FCC regulations, were done in 1996! Get the information out to the public so we can protect ourselves and have cell towers and antennae placed smartly and safely! Thank you for your time.

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.

World Council for Health (WCH) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Request for Information. WCH is an international health advocacy organisation committed to promoting informed consent, individual health sovereignty, scientific transparency, and the protection of human and environmental health. We believe that the rapid and largely unrestrained expansion of wireless technologies represents a significant public health and environmental policy concern that warrants urgent, independent and comprehensive scientific scrutiny. Over recent decades, wireless communications infrastructure has expanded dramatically, introducing increasingly widespread and persistent exposure to man-made electromagnetic fields. While technological innovation has brought considerable benefits, WCH is concerned that the pace of deployment has outstripped the assessment of potential long-term biological and environmental consequences, particularly in relation to chronic, cumulative and involuntary exposure. In 2023, WCH published its Policy Brief on the Effects of Unregulated Digitalization, examining the wider implications of rapidly expanding digital and wireless technologies for public health, human rights, democratic accountability and the environment. This body of work includes the recommendations of the late Dr Arthur Firstenberg, who devoted decades to investigating the biological and ecological effects of electromagnetic fields. His work brought together scientific publications examining possible effects on neurological function, cellular processes, reproduction, wildlife, biodiversity and ecosystem health. Of particular concern is the extent to which existing RF exposure standards have historically focused on established thermal effects, while questions concerning long-term exposure, non-thermal biological effects, signal modulation, vulnerable populations and ecological impacts remain contested or insufficiently resolved. WCH believes that public health policy must consider the full breadth of available evidence, including research findings that challenge prevailing assumptions about exposure thresholds and biological safety. We are particularly concerned about the implications for children, pregnant women, individuals reporting electromagnetic hypersensitivity, and those who have little practical ability to avoid exposure in their homes, schools, workplaces or communities. The continued expansion of 5G telecommunications and wireless infrastructure including the introduction of new frequencies, network configurations and connected technologies raise further questions about aggregate exposure, long-term health effects and the adequacy of existing safety assessments. The potential environmental implications must also be considered. The Brief highlights research examining associations between anthropogenic electromagnetic fields and changes in the behaviour, development, reproduction and survival of insects, birds, plants and other organisms. These findings require careful evaluation, including consideration of study limitations and other environmental factors, as part of a comprehensive approach to ecological protection. WCH therefore calls for an independent, transparent and multidisciplinary review of the scientific evidence, free from inappropriate commercial or regulatory conflicts of interest. Such a review should address thermal and possible non-thermal effects, chronic and cumulative exposure, biological responses to modulation and pulsed signals, and the implications of exposure across the lifespan. We further urge HHS to consider the precautionary principle, particularly where exposure is involuntary, where vulnerable populations may be affected, and where meaningful opportunities to reduce unnecessary exposure exist. This includes serious consideration of practical alternatives such as wired communications infrastructure, greater public disclosure of exposure information, improved professional education, and individual choice. WCH encourages greater coordination between public health authorities, environmental agencies, independent researchers and affected communities, recognising that the potential implications of electromagnetic pollution extend beyond conventional telecommunications regulation. The protection of public health and the natural environment must remain central to technological policy, and not be treated as secondary considerations after widespread deployment has already occurred. We believe that responsible technological development must be guided by independent science, transparency, informed consent, the protection of vulnerable populations, and a commitment to safeguarding the health of both present and future generations. Yours sincerely Dr Tess Lawrie MBBCh, PhD Ambassador World Council for Health worldcouncilforhealth.org https://www.worldcouncilforhealth.org/what-is-5g-health-risks/

I urge HHS to prioritize independent research into the potential long-term health effects of radiofrequency radiation and to transparently evaluate whether current exposure limits adequately protect public health. My concerns include possible cancer risks, exposure beginning in childhood and continuing throughout life, and whether research adequately reflects today’s devices and exposure patterns. There are scientific findings that warrant follow-up. The National Toxicology Program’s studies found clear evidence of malignant heart schwannomas and some evidence of malignant brain gliomas in male rats exposed to radiofrequency radiation. These were high-exposure animal studies using signals associated with 2G and 3G technology; they do not establish that everyday wireless exposure or 5G causes cancer in humans. Nevertheless, they deserve careful investigation. Human research also needs to be represented accurately. The large COSMOS cohort study did not find increased brain-tumor risk among people with the greatest cumulative mobile-phone call time. Reassuring findings should inform policy alongside animal findings and remaining uncertainties. I ask HHS to: • Fund independent, long-term research, including studies of children, contemporary wireless technologies, and well-characterized exposure levels. • Evaluate cancer, reproductive and developmental outcomes, sleep, and neurological symptoms, clearly distinguishing established effects from preliminary findings. • Review exposure standards transparently and explain how they address long-term exposure and potentially vulnerable populations. • Require disclosure of research funding and conflicts of interest. • Offer practical, proportionate guidance for people who wish to reduce exposure, including increasing distance from phones during calls. People reporting symptoms they associate with electromagnetic exposure deserve respectful clinical attention and rigorous investigation without assuming the cause in advance. The public deserves clear information about what is known, what remains uncertain, and what evidence would justify stronger protections.

As a physiotherapist who is also electro-hypersensitive, I spent 25 years in private practice—15 of which were in a dedicated professional space I had built in my own garden. I shielded this space so that I could continue to practice my profession and treat individuals who, like me, were electro-hypersensitive and had become lost within the medical system. My neurosensory approach allows me to explain why we are all electrosensitive and why any of us could potentially become electro-hypersensitive. I practice the Dicke and Teirich-Leube reflex massage—which focuses on the skin’s connection to the nervous system—and I employ a holistic, behavioral approach to the body (utilizing the Mézières method and the GDS muscle chain system). To understand this, one must look to embryology: the skin and the nervous system share the same embryonic origin. Lacking any natural shielding, the skin is regularly subjected to hyperstimulation from the artificial electromagnetic fields (EMFs) generated by the wireless technologies and the pervasive electrical infrastructure now found throughout our living environments. The nervous system, under constant assault by these EMFs, becomes unable to maintain the body’s homeostasis. This leads to a breakdown, manifesting in a wide range of symptoms: headaches, dizziness, tinnitus, hyperacusis, neuromuscular and joint tension, skin issues, heart palpitations, anxiety, a sense of oppression, digestive and gynecological disturbances, neurodegenerative diseases, chronic illnesses, and cancer—as well as cognitive impairment, insomnia, exhaustion, and physiological depression. Any neurosensory cell can become a source of pain when subjected to persistent aggression. Certain cells are particularly sensitive to these constant vibrations—for instance, Pacinian corpuscles, which respond to frequencies between 30 and 1,500 Hertz. These waves cause surges within the body; the central, peripheral, and autonomic nervous systems are not designed to handle such frequencies. I invite you to explore my document on point26.com regarding bodily sensations and somesthesia: https://poem26.com/le-ressenti-du-corps-en-presence-des-ondes-electromagnetiques-artificielles/ This is a dossier I submitted to ANSES (the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety) when I joined—on behalf of my association, Poem26, of which I am president—the "Radiofrequency and Health" dialogue committee in Maisons-Alfort. It is also urgent to consider the differences between men and women regarding these artificial electromagnetic fields; our neurosensory system is more reactive than that of men. While men also possess this system, they tend to be less attuned to their own bodily sensations, yet the resulting symptoms can be far more severe and serious—such as heart attacks, strokes, colorectal cancer, or infertility. For women, it is crucial to examine the issue of endometriosis; our blood—as women—reacts very poorly to these artificial electromagnetic fields, which may be the root cause of gynecological problems such as amenorrhea, dysmenorrhea, or endometriosis. I personally experienced significant issues with low frequencies: my ferritin levels rose to 900. In cases of electromagnetic hypersensitivity, one may observe a marked increase in ferritin levels—or, conversely, very low levels—depending on whether or not the individual has reached menopause. The only way to determine if you are electro-hypersensitive is to spend several days in an "electromagnetic dead zone" (an area free from such waves) and to monitor biological markers both before and after exposure to electromagnetic fields. Humans have been on Earth for hundreds of thousands of years; yet, in just 30 years, we have altered our electromagnetic environment through high-frequency (radio-frequency) fields, and over the last 200 years, we have transformed our electrical and magnetic environment through low-frequency fields. The human body cannot adapt to such changes in such a short period of time. I remain at your disposal for further discussion. Catherine Neyrand, October 18, 2026 Physical Therapist, Electrosensitive (EHS) President of the association Poem 26 (https://poem26.com/) Mother of a young adult who was severely electrosensitive (EHS) during her adolescence

I submit this comment requesting independent scientific investigation, transparent environmental monitoring, and stronger public accountability regarding electromagnetic field (EMF), WIFI, and ELF exposure and its potential effects on human health, cellular function, neurological development, and future generations. The expansion of telecommunications and electrical infrastructure raises legitimate public-health and bioethical questions. Wireless RF radiation and extremely low-frequency (ELF) fields, including 60 Hz power transmission, have distinct physical characteristics and must be evaluated separately, including their potential cumulative and long-term effects. Located on schools, churches and parks. Children are stakeholders, not merely passive recipients of technological development. Their developing nervous systems, cellular processes, and longer potential lifetime exposures warrant specific scientific attention. Pregnancy, fetal development, infancy, and childhood represent critical periods during which environmental influences may have lasting consequences. Human health depends upon cellular homeostasis, mitochondrial bioenergetics, ATP production, DNA integrity, and coordinated neurological signaling. Disruption of these processes can contribute to disease and impaired development. Whether particular environmental EMF exposures adversely affect these mechanisms, and under what conditions, requires rigorous investigation rather than unsupported assumptions of either harm or safety. HHS should prioritize research examining oxidative stress, mitochondrial signaling, membrane potential, cellular repair, neurodevelopment, reproductive outcomes, and potential intergenerational effects. Studies must distinguish correlation from causation and evaluate exposure intensity, frequency, duration, developmental stage, and individual susceptibility. Existing epidemiological research has identified associations between certain residential ELF magnetic-field exposures and childhood leukemia, although a causal relationship remains unestablished. Such findings demonstrate the importance of continued investigation rather than premature dismissal of unresolved questions. The ethical question extends beyond whether an exposure meets current regulatory limits. It concerns whether those limits adequately account for developing biological systems, prolonged exposure, combined environmental conditions, and populations not sufficiently represented in existing research. Under principles of environmental justice, nonmaleficence, transparency, and intergenerational equity, the public deserves meaningful access to scientific findings and environmental exposure information. The burden of investigating potential public-health risks should not fall exclusively upon families who lack the resources to commission environmental testing or independent scientific evaluations. Communities should have access to infrastructure information, standardized exposure measurements, monitoring results, and understandable explanations of applicable safety standards. Public participation must be meaningful, particularly where infrastructure affects residential neighborhoods, schools, and vulnerable populations. I request that HHS: Support independent longitudinal studies evaluating RF, EMF and ELF exposures, particularly during pregnancy, infancy, and childhood. Investigate cellular and neurological mechanisms, including mitochondrial function, ATP metabolism, oxidative regulation, and neurodevelopment, using reproducible methods. Evaluate cumulative and chronic exposure patterns while distinguishing established effects from emerging hypotheses. Assess potential ecological consequences for wildlife, pollinators, vegetation, and interconnected environmental systems. Establish transparent public reporting of exposure measurements, research limitations, funding sources, and regulatory assumptions. Examine disproportionate environmental burdens and ensure meaningful stakeholder participation in research and policy development. Coordinate with the FCC, EPA, and relevant agencies to address scientific gaps and clarify oversight responsibilities. The absence of conclusive evidence of harm is not equivalent to conclusive evidence of safety under every exposure condition. Scientific uncertainty requires investigation, not speculation or complacency. Technological advancement carries corresponding responsibilities. Public-health protection should not depend upon proving widespread injury after exposure has occurred. Children, families, communities, ecosystems, and future generations are stakeholders in decisions affecting shared environments. Our responsibility is not simply to accommodate technological progress, but to ensure that progress does not compromise the biological integrity, developmental potential, and environmental inheritance of generations yet to come. Respectfully, Cherrish Castaneda Roots Indigenous Priory Sacramento County, California