Research & federal duties

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 know MANY people who can not sleep in a home with WIfi router transmitting. There are MANY studies that support this fact. Even music at 440hz is harmful or at least causes anxiety. 432Hz (original) does not harm body.

I'm constantly amazed and disturbed that EMF radiation has been so ignored by health and regulatory agencies. The evidence of harm caused by EMFs is overwhelming, especially with the proliferation of cell phones and cell towers bristling with antennas. It's high time the industry was reigned in and safe standards were established.

I submit this comment as someone concerned with the scientific evidence on RF/EMF health effects. HHS should prioritize independent research into nonthermal mechanisms (oxidative stress, DNA effects, neuroendocrine disruption, cumulative exposure), update assessment methods for real-world multi-source long-duration conditions, and evaluate whether current federal limits protect human and animal populations. I do not consent to further exposure from these improperly evaluated EMF technologies without adequate safety testing for optimal human health and longevity. My response draws on the research, clinical observations, and congressional testimony of Robert O. Becker, MD (1923–2008), orthopedic surgeon and bioelectromagnetics pioneer at Syracuse VA Hospital and SUNY Upstate. He authored over 150 papers, books including The Body Electric and Electromagnetism and Life, and testified to Congress and state commissions. Becker established that organisms generate and respond to minute electrical currents and EMFs regulating growth, CNS function, and biological cycles. Man-made EMFs far below thermal levels act as nonspecific biological stressors producing wide adverse effects. Key findings (Questions 5, 6, 11, 12): The “thermal-effects-only” doctrine is obsolete. Organisms have specialized mechanisms (including pineal sensitivity) tuned to Earth’s magnetic cycles. Chronic man-made fields disrupt these, inducing chronic stress with weight loss, diminished immunity, neuroendocrine changes, and altered brain function. Cellularly, exposure accelerates DNA production and alters chromosomes, raising growth rates and genetic abnormalities. Clinically this yields reduced fertility, low birth weights, higher infection/cancer susceptibility, birth defects (eg, Down syndrome), and psychological disturbances. Evidence includes: 60-Hz environmental fields causing stress hormonal/body-weight/blood changes across mouse generations (third-generation infant mortality 50% vs <5%); geomagnetic storm correlations with schizophrenia admissions in >16,000 patients; human reaction-time increases from low-strength VLF fields; animal findings of deficient bone healing, altered growth, and tumor-cell chromosome changes. Becker linked post-1900 power and communications EMFs, the most drastic alteration of Earth’s electromagnetic environment, to rises in birth defects, cancers, mental disorders, and teenage suicide. These fields act at fundamental levels rather than causing single specific diseases. U.S. limits rested on the inadequate thermal-only model. Military/regulatory responses often denied nonthermal effects or issued biased reviews (eg, Navy ELF studies). Becker called for independent research, free of industry/military conflict and risk-benefit decisions by the exposed population. Children, developing organisms, and those with preexisting conditions need particular attention due to higher cell-division rates and cumulative disruption. Cumulative exposures from power systems plus wireless technologies (phones, Wi-Fi, smart meters, 5G/6G, IoT) have intensified. Precautionary reductions in unnecessary exposure, especially in schools, homes, and near infrastructure are warranted. Becker’s conclusion remains pertinent: man-made EMFs constitute a serious health hazard requiring urgent steps. I urge HHS to give substantial weight to this foundational evidence. References 1. Becker RO. Statement before the House Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources. October 6, 1987. https://www.robertobecker.net/PDFs/1987PowerlinesStatement.pdf 2. Becker RO. Statement of Robert O. Becker, M.D., to Subcommittee on Public Health of the U.S. House of Representatives in connection with hearings on H.R. 10790, Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1967. https://www.robertobecker.net/PDFs/BF037-HR10790Statement1967.pdf 3. Becker RO. The possible hazards of human exposure to magnetic fields. Consultant report for the Joint Technical Advisory Subcommittee 63.1.4. IEEE; 1968. 4. Becker RO, Selden G. The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life. William Morrow; 1985. 5. Becker RO, Marino AA. Electromagnetism and Life. State University of New York Press; 1982.

I am a concerned citizen. These towers and 5G going up everywhere without much oversight or public input at all, when studies have shown negative health consequences from living too close to them or increasing amounts of exposure. Please stop the use of these. No tech advancement is worth the health of our citizens.

Thank you so much for your efforts to study the long overdue topic. The association of EMF radiation and negative health outcomes is the most important public health issue in modern days. My personal experience suggests the positive correlations. I experienced symptoms of dry mouth, dry eyes, fatigue, palpitation, poor appetite, low energy -- all the so called nonspecific symptoms that could be caused by anything. Once I began wear EMF protective vest, all the above symptoms resolved when I went to the same environment for days. My suggestions to the HHS approaches: 1. study the associations between EMF exposure and health issues (energy level, cardiac symptoms, blood pressure, infection rates, nutritional status, etc) 2. study the intensity of such association to see if there is a dose relations 3. identify high risk populations, e.g., those with lower BMI, lower fat tissues, lower muscle mass, immunocompromised, etc) 4. high risk organs, such as reproductive systems (ovaries, epidermis), cardiovascular system, GI system, central nervous system, neck area (with multiple glands), etc. 5. preventive measures, such as EMF protection gears 6. measures to easily check environmental EMF exposures to alert population 7. regulations to mandate city or government to publish EMF exposure data There are many wonderful and ethical scientists around, but there are also many scientists who are under the influence of political ideologies. participating scientists need to declare conflict of interest in full and take full personal responsibility if breaching conflict of interest. To prevent plagiarism or fabrication, I suggest that all process of data collection, data analysis and methodology to be monitored by 3rd party. Thank you again for the thoughts and proposals. Your efforts to improve public health is truly appreciated.

I believe WiFi and cell towers contribute to many health issues.Any negative frequency will. Humans are bombarded 24/7. I believe it causes brain fog,anxiety and damage to our nervous systems, among other issues not understood or noted as of yet. Please do amasoce study on negative frequency and then use of positive ones to heal.

None of these frequencies were meant for humanity and it’s very concerning that no one is truly doing any research into how these affect the human body, including everything that has been injected, sprayed and placed in foods for us to ingest. It needs to be stopped. I feel like no one is listening to what the American people truly want.

There needs to be much more research regarding cell towers and wifi. There is much anecdotal information regarding the health danger that cell towers and wifi are. But, there needs to be well funded, extensive research, funded by parties with no vested interest in the outcome of the research. In my opinion, cell towers should not be allowed within 5 miles of residential areas or other high population areas.

You should speak to Dr Paul Héroux at McGill University. He’s spent decades researching how EMFs affect the human body and has published peer-reviewed research identifying potential ways they can cause harm at a cellular level. His research: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul-Heroux Two particularly relevant papers: 1. The Collision Between Wireless and Biology (2025) Explores how wireless radiation may affect biological processes without heating tissue. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844025006474 2. Extra-Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields Alter Cancer Cells Through Metabolic Restriction (2013) Investigates how weak magnetic fields affect cancer cells, including a possible mechanism involving mitochondrial ATP synthase. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23915261/ He also discussed his research in a Reddit post 12 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/s/5ftqT3cE0O