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.
Thousands of peer-reviewed articles (https://bioinitiative.org/?sm_guid=MTA1NDMyOXw1OTY3NTg4OXwtMXx0ZHJlaWVyQGhvdG1haWwuY29tfDkwNzgyMTd8fDB8MHwzMzQ1NzQxNzR8MTA2MXwwfDB8fDE5NjY5ODJ8MA2) have shown that wireless radiation at levels allowed by the FCC can harm children, adults, plants, trees, birds and their migration, pets, wildlife, pollinators and other insects.
September 30, 2026
I am submitting this response as an individual reporting my firsthand experience with wireless/RF exposure and changes in my health and functioning that I have observed over many years.
For most of my life I was healthy. I went to college and graduate school, had part-time jobs, and then taught high school in Texas from 2012-2017. And then I got sick. There had been some warning signs, including migraine (starting 2014) and fatigue, but the illness became so severe and seemed to come out of nowhere in 2015. I saw 52 doctors over two years. None could determine what was happening or offer an explanation for the severity of my symptoms, and the primary treatment offered was various pharmaceuticals.
Looking back, I see that several environmental exposures were occurring at the same time. I was working in a school where our classrooms were under a gym. A coworker across the hall had visible mold in his room. The spring before I became severely ill (2015), the Wi-Fi router in the building was upgraded and placed directly outside my room. The building I moved into to live had more than 50 floors and antennas on the roof, and was across the street from a hospital with its own antennas. Hundreds of people lived in the building, with their own routers, cell phones, and other wireless devices.
I cannot determine which exposures contributed to my illness, or to what degree. However, over the years I began noticing a consistent relationship between reducing my wireless exposure and changes in specific symptoms. For example, health professionals have informed me that mycotoxins (which I have high levels of) are increased by EMF exposure, and that heavy metals in the body (which I have high levels of) are made worse by EMF exposure. This is an additional concern that other health concerns are made worse by EMFs.
When I was staying with friends while trying to find suitable housing (2017-2020), I asked them to turn off the Wi-Fi router at night. I noticed a significant improvement in my sleep. I also told my cardiologist about my observations when I was undergoing a Holter monitor evaluation for heart palpitations. I had noticed that the palpitations were worse when the Wi-Fi was operating.
I subsequently began reducing my wireless exposure wherever possible. I use wired Ethernet connections for my computer and phone, keep devices in airplane mode when possible, and not using Bluetooth devices.
My overall health remains poor, but I continue to notice exacerbation of my symptoms with increased wireless exposure. I can often tell without looking at my phone whether it is transmitting or in airplane mode because I experience an intense frontal headache when it is transmitting.
I have also experienced a significant change associated with the cell tower nearest my home. When the tower underwent an upgrade (2026), I experienced a substantial increase in headaches, migraines, head pressure, fatigue, and brain fog. These symptoms have affected my ability to function in daily life. I am currently exploring ways to reduce my exposure while sleeping, but remain exposed during most of the day.
My experience has left me concerned about the cumulative and largely unavoidable nature of wireless exposure in modern life. I live in a rural area and have deliberately reduced wireless technology in my home, yet I cannot eliminate exposure because of nearby infrastructure and wireless signals in the surrounding environment.
I feel like the canary in the coal mine: someone who experiences significant effects that may be associated with exposure levels that most people encounter without apparent difficulty. I do not claim to know what mechanism explains my experience or what conclusions should be drawn from it. I am asking that experiences such as mine be taken seriously as information worthy of investigation.
I believe research should examine not only exposure levels under controlled conditions, but also real-world cumulative exposure, changes in exposure over time, individual variability in response, vulnerable populations, and what happens when individuals reduce their exposure. People should also have meaningful information about the wireless infrastructure and sources of RF exposure in and around their homes, workplaces, schools, and communities.
As a MAHA grandma and in my research during the pandemic, this seems to be a huge topic (among the many).
I have a niece who died in her early 40's, shortly after giving birth, from rapidly growing ovarian cancer. This was over 10 years ago. Her husband is convinced it was caused by her laptop, which she had on her lap constantly.
I attended lectures with CeCe Doucette, who runs Massachusetts for Safe Technology. Her guests were hugely injured by this EMF exposure. A friend of mine is totally disabled because of it.
Pat Abrami was a Republican legislator who brought this issue to the New Hampshire house in regards to the dangers of 5G.
In my life, I have two little grandchildren. I am deeply concerned for them, as their parents both work from home and are on wifi A LOT.
For me, while this may not be directly related to wifi, it may be screens. I am on them probably three hours per day, since Covid. I have developed cataracts. I understand that many younger people are developing this problem as well.
There is so much to be studied here...the eyes, the brain, the nervous system, internal organs.
I am submitting this comment because I believe we need to take a much closer look at the potential health effects of wireless radiation and the rapidly increasing amount of RF exposure in our daily lives.
I am increasingly concerned about how much wireless technology surrounds us every day. Cell phones, Wi-Fi routers, Bluetooth devices, smart appliances, wireless infrastructure, and cell towers have become so common that it is difficult to avoid exposure, even in our homes and workplaces.
As someone who works in the health and wellness field, I have become increasingly interested in the factors that may contribute to chronic health problems. I believe we should be willing to investigate environmental exposures, including RF radiation, rather than assuming that current exposure standards necessarily represent the full picture of human health.
I am particularly concerned about children and long-term exposure. Children are exposed to wireless devices and infrastructure from a very young age, often for many hours a day. We need to understand the potential implications of decades of cumulative exposure, especially as wireless technology continues to expand.
I am not claiming that RF radiation is responsible for any particular health condition. Rather, I am asking HHS to take the potential risks seriously and ensure that the research is comprehensive, independent, transparent, and based on the best available evidence.
I believe Americans deserve clear information about potential health and environmental risks associated with RF radiation. This includes reviewing existing research, identifying gaps in our knowledge, examining biological effects that may occur below current regulatory limits, and considering the cumulative and long-term nature of exposure.
I also believe that people who report experiencing symptoms or other health effects that they associate with RF exposure should be listened to and their experiences investigated rather than dismissed.
I encourage HHS to prioritize independent research and to ensure that public health policy is informed by health scientists, medical professionals, and researchers with relevant expertise, not solely by agencies whose primary responsibility is regulating communications technology.
We have an opportunity to better understand an increasingly important environmental exposure. I encourage HHS to thoroughly examine the evidence and take appropriate steps to protect public health while continuing to investigate questions that remain unanswered.
Public Comment to HHS on RF/Wireless Radiation
To the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS),
My name is Lisa Hildwine, and I am submitting this public comment to urge HHS to urgently and independently evaluate the potential adverse health and environmental effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation, commonly referred to as wireless radiation. I appreciate HHS opening this comment period and taking a leadership role in an issue that directly affects public health.
For too long, the health questions surrounding RF exposure have been treated primarily as a communications issue. In my view, this is not only about technology and spectrum management—it is about medicine, biology, neurology, cardiology, and public health, and it requires HHS-level attention.
Family health impacts and why I am concerned
I am writing as a family member who has witnessed severe and escalating medical and neurological events that I believe warrant urgent investigation for possible links to RF/wireless exposure.
Beginning in 2017, my son experienced serious health and neurological changes across multiple settings including home, jail, and hospital. These concerns worsened significantly in 2026.
In 2026, my son had ER visits and inpatient diagnostics at two hospitals (September 2026). During this period, there were events consistent with severe neurological compromise, including stroke-like symptoms and behavior that was profoundly out of character for him. There were also concerns for a possible cardiac event. Additionally, a traumatic brain injury (TBI) was documented on MRI, without any known external physical incident that would explain the injury.
I understand that a personal experience does not prove causation. However, I also know that public health agencies have a duty to investigate credible reports and patterns—especially when exposures are widespread, increasing, and often unavoidable.
Targeting, harassment, and the need to evaluate real-world exposure conditions
I also have documented concerns about harassment and targeting beginning in 2016. I am asking HHS to recognize that “real-world exposure” is not always a simple consumer-choice scenario. Some individuals may face conditions that involve coercion, abuse, surveillance technologies, and an inability to escape exposure, particularly when they are in controlled environments.
High-risk populations: incarcerated people and trafficked individuals
I am especially concerned about populations who have little to no ability to reduce RF exposure or leave the environment, including:
Incarcerated people
Trafficked individuals and others under coercive control
These groups may face higher exposure, limited medical advocacy, barriers to documentation, and reduced access to independent evaluation. If RF/wireless exposure can contribute to neurological or cardiovascular events, then these populations may be disproportionately harmed and least able to be protected.
Additional note: congressional request for documentation
I also note that Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna (Florida’s 13th District) has requested that I submit documentation regarding these concerns. I am including this statement here to underscore that these issues are being raised not only by individual families, but also through constituent communications with elected officials.
Closing
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I urge HHS to approach RF/wireless radiation as a public health issue requiring urgency, scientific integrity, and compassion for families reporting harm. People need health agencies to listen, investigate, and act.
Sincerely,
Lisa Hildwine Tampa, Florida 808-398-8670 aiyana@wildlyaiyana.org