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 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.

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.

We have discovered that the 5 Ghz wifi radio band prevents my wife from sleeping properly. My wife had a sudden onset of disturbed sleep every night. We gave careful thought to what may have changed in our household and realized we had installed Verizon FIOS service. Verizon provided us with a device which provides two wifi bands, 2.5 Ghz ad 5 Ghz. When we turned off the wifi transmissions, my wife's sleep immediately returned to normal. Without telling my wife, I turned the two wifi bands back on, one at a time. the 2.5 Ghz band did not seem to disturb her sleep. A few nights later, when I turned the 5Ghz band back on, her sleep disruption immediately returned. Turning the band off again relived her problems. So it is clear the the 5 Ghz microwave radiation has profoundly negative effects on her. This makes me suspect that all of the microwave radiation we are subjected two can be biologically active. Even if the effects are sub clinical, there is no way to know what long term harms will result from uncontrolled exposure to microwaves, much of which is at alarmingly high intensities.

The Federal government has abdicated its role in protecting the public from sources of potentially harmful non-ionizing radiation emanating from cell towers, routers, microwave facilities, satellites, and connected devices. The FCC standards for exposure are really quite a joke, not having been updated since 1996. Yet, even if those standards were adequate at the time, which is highly questionable, the amount of radiation from the above sources has exploded, especially since 2010, and includes parts of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum which were not in common use at the time. It is a clear dereliction of duty to roll out features like 5G, Starlink, and Bluetooth without first PROVING that this radiation is harmless. The burden of proof should be on the companies and the regulators, not citizens. The FCC should be in high gear to correct the deficiencies in its own studies, its professed ignorance of studies which show harmful effects, and revoke any and all licenses that can't meet the bar of proven safety without further delay and obfuscation. The HHS has been absolutely ineffective and disinterested in protecting humans, animals, and insects from RF radiation. There can be no excuses. The only response that is worth listening to from HHS is a moratorium on any further deployment of any source of RF emissions, and notice to the industry that its continued license to operate will be provisional for 12 months pending proof based on controlled studies that RF emissions are harmless.

LED headlights are TOO BRIGHT & make it more difficult to drive into oncoming traffic as well as blinding you in the rear view mirror at night. The Food and Drug Administration must comply with 21 U.S.C. 360ii to test and evaluate LED headlights for biological safety. The brighter lights also impact migrating bird species at night.

I became extremely sensitive to EMF after PGE put a cellular smart meter on my house. I lost my high paying job, my house and cannot be near cell towers or cell phones anymore. It completely destroyed my life. Regulations have to be put into place. Studies have to be acted on. Corporations cannot be allowed to destroy us.

My name is and I live in New Jersey. I am a former nurse and 67 years old. I was diagnosed with EHS environmental hypersensitivity in 2018 when I moved into a rental after selling my house. Within less than two days I was falling over from dizziness bruised four ribs couldn’t swallow. I was crying filled with anxiety and depression. When two days prior I was perfectly fine. Then more symptoms started appearing, and then I knew that I was being exposed to something. This was not normal and I went to my integrative who had diagnosed me a few years prior with mold illness. A rattle off 17 symptoms and he asked me if I had a smart meter on the building and I said what is that? I’ve never heard of one and I had no idea what it was and he explained and he said go back there and take a look and see if you have one in sure enough I did. I bought a tri meter to test the radiation and I have the videos of it and times out can’t even measure the radiation level. It’s so high. Every meter. Then I came inside to check the dirty energy coming out of the sockets and the radiation is blaring out of them too. Now I’ve got the refrigerator. That’s a smart. I have to have all these boards the circuit boards removed from my appliances because you’re all a bunch of criminals and you’re violating our constitutional rights and we don’t want any part of this nonsense and you’re trying to shove it down our throats. What we’re gonna shove it right back down your throat so that you can choke just as we’re choking. So then they put a smart meter in my house my water authority in my township without my permission and I have opt out for a traditional analog. They’re refusing to give me one and instead they’re threatening to call outreach and social services to do a fully evaluation and intervention so they’d rather lock me up then address the fact that the smart meter they placed in my house now a year and a half ago is caused permanent damage to my hands. I have CRPS the most painful disease known to medicine no cure no treatment so they’ve caused permanent disability in these hands now with that meter and they’ve committed a bias crime because they were in receipt of my doctors letters from 23 when I moved in along with all the medical documentation of the harms that come to people when they’re exposed to this radiation and that there’s never been long-term safety studies of 10 to 15 years because or lousy government, all of you three letter agencies, you know what you’re doing and by refusing to do a long-term safety study, which was demanded of you in 2012 which of course you ignored and then you just threw them on all the houses and businesses just sick and everybody because you knew if you did the long-term safety studies it would prove that they were highly unsafe and that they were causing heart attack strokes, cancer‘s birth defects, auto immunity, which is not the body attacking itself. That’s another lie. The medical community got wrong and so anyway it’s the same thing as cannabis you got away with saying there was no medical benefit yeah because you didn’t do the studies so that wasn’t a lie was it? But you harmed a lot of people by keeping it and illegal drug in the same class with heroin when nobody’s ever died or been harmed from cannabis and you also took out patterns in the 60s in the 70s on different properties within the cannabis plant now why would you have done that if there was no medical benefit? That’s fraud corruption. But you put veterans in jail for being picked up in the possession of one joint. One cannabis joint and a brave man that fought for this country the wars you got us into intentionally so you could make money you sacrifice our good decent men and women and then you verify them when they come home you won’t give them support you won’t give me even a small little tiny house and you give them the lousiest medical care that there is on the planet. Thank you veterans for doing the job that nobody else would do and now we’re gonna disrespect you on your way back home. These things are not safe and I’m living the proof because my blood pressure from this smart meter they put in my house a little over a year ago is spiking my BP up to 150/110 and like BP along with the permanent damage to my hands through the nervous system, which all this dirty energy is known to constantly irritate and that’s why I can’t have them in her on my house and so my township is in violation of my rights, the law, a whole bunch of laws, HUD and more so where is my free lawyer paid for my tax money. I’m sick of suffering because if you’re a corruption. Everybody’s sick from these meters that’s your answer. The majority of people want these off their houses that’s your answer. Just look at the medical documentation of what this stuff does you don’t need to be taking surveys you’re supposed to be doing your job and these things never should’ve been!