HHS EMFTHE PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM
The people. The questions. The public record.An independent RF Safe project
Forum index › TopicsLatest posting day

TOPIC BOARD

Research & federal duties

2151 original comments · Newest first

Browse topics
Read full comments below. More load as you scroll.
Posted 2026-09-23#0512 · Permanent link ↗

Argues current regulations are outdated and asks HHS to follow policy recommendations in attached researc…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
The attached published and expert scientific research recommends key policy updates. Current regulations are outdated and do not protect the public. These pertain to Question 5. Please follow recommendations of the published papers attached.

Attachments · 6

Original public attachments. Their contents are not included in category reviews.

Posted 2026-09-23#0510 · Permanent link ↗

Reports sensitivity and numerous neurological and physical symptoms attributed to multiple RF sources. Re…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
EMF /RF exposure is making Americans sick. Studies are outdated and do not align with population growth and the fact that every household including apartments where the distance from each other is minimal and residents or homeowners all have cell phones , WiFi routers, smart meters , etc that add to the problem . My cell phone, my WiFi router, smart meter, etc all emit high frequency signals all day . I turn it all off at night but I still am affected all day everyday . When you consider how many people are walking around with cell phones. GPS tracking, WiFi devices in their hands , in their cars, that constantly ping cell towers the frequencies are astronomical . I am extremely sensitive to EMF/RF waves or frequencies that bombard me daily. My symptoms include daily headaches , nausea ,muscle cramps, fatigue , memory loss , cognitive decline , irritability, trouble speaking , weight loss , and sleepless nights every night. I feel electrical shocks , literally. I have uncontrolled muscle spasms and cramping and trouble with balance . There are 4 giant cell towers within 1 mile of my home and I’m sure those are the culprits along with everything else that’s provided by big tech companies. Does the dept of health and human services really know what is attached to those towers and whether or not it can be used for nefarious purposes. I purchased a EMF/RF reader and it’s reading is in the danger zone , all day . I try to stay away from windows and move to the most interior room to avoid the frequencies, but it’s everywhere. I have no safe zone anywhere. Sometimes , when going through an intersection, I get a very strong feeling of something that pulsates my brain that last about 4 seconds and is debilitating . Please do more testing on these towers, devices, routers, smart meters, cell phones, etc. that emit EMF/RF frequencies as they are making a lot of us sick. Satellites in the atmosphere also contribute to the abundance of electromagnetic RADIATION the American tax paying citizens are showered with on the daily. I have doctor reports and MRI’s showing a rapid decline in health due to the EMF fields . The reports and data regarding EMF’s are outdated and need to be re-examined, fast. Americans are not free. We are tracked and under surveillance, monitored and controlled by these anomalies . Please I’m begging you. It’s like being silently killed with no smoking gun and no accountability for anyone of these high tech corporations and their shareholders. I am 61 and have never felt anything like this before phones and towers . We should all go back to Ethernet and dial up phones .

Attachments · 6

Original public attachments. Their contents are not included in category reviews.

Posted 2026-09-23#0509 · Permanent link ↗

Requests research and evidence-based clinical guidance for unexplained symptoms and submits two reports a…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
See attached file(s)Please see my two attached reports regarding my personal experience with long-term unexplained physical symptoms and my medical history and testing. I respectfully ask HHS to consider my experience as part of its review of RF/EMF exposure and potential health effects. I also ask HHS to consider the need for further scientific research and evidence-based clinical guidance for civilians experiencing unexplained symptoms. Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment. Respectfully, Hideko Go

Attachments · 2

Original public attachments. Their contents are not included in category reviews.

Posted 2026-09-23#0507 · Permanent link ↗

A commenter identifying as a scientist submits an attached list of published EMF research and mentions in…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
As a scientist who has done a great deal of published research in this area, I have attached a file of my published research. I have also given invited lectures in many countries all over the world on my emf research. Allan H. Frey

Attachments · 2

Original public attachments. Their contents are not included in category reviews.

Posted 2026-09-22#0502 · Permanent link ↗

Requests HHS-led independent review, updated protection, realistic exposure measurements, monitoring and …

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
I submit this as an individual consumer and family member, relying on peer-reviewed research, federal reports, and court findings cited below (Qs 2, 3). Concern (Qs 5, 6): FCC's RF limits date to 1996 and address only short-term tissue heating, not chronic exposure, pulsed/modulated signals, multi-source cumulative exposure, or children's thinner skulls. In Environmental Health Trust v. FCC (D.C. Cir. 2021), the court found the FCC failed to justify that its limits protect against non-cancer harms, citing unaddressed evidence on children and long-term exposure, and remanded the issue. HHS, not FCC, should lead on the health basis for any standard. Evidence below current limits (Q12): NTP's $30M study (2018) found "clear evidence" of heart schwannomas and "some evidence" of brain/adrenal tumors in RF-exposed rats, with DNA damage reported in a follow-up (Smith-Roe et al. 2020). Italy's Ramazzini Institute independently found the same rare tumor at lower exposures comparable to cell tower emissions (Falcioni et al. 2018). IARC classifies RF-EMF as "possibly carcinogenic" (Group 2B, 2011). Reviews report oxidative stress (Yakymenko et al. 2016), reduced sperm quality (Adams et al. 2014), and DNA strand breaks (Lai & Singh 1995; REFLEX project 2004). Technologies changing cumulative exposure (Q13): 5G/small cells near homes and windows; Wi-Fi transmitting continuously in classrooms; smart meters installed on homes, often without real opt-out, pulsing near bedrooms; satellite broadband (e.g., Starlink) creating a new planet-wide RF source; networked cameras (e.g., Flock) on public poles with cellular modems and no resident notice; wireless earbuds transmitting inside the ear canal for hours daily, especially in teens; EVs producing low-frequency magnetic fields in cabins where children ride (IARC links this field type to childhood leukemia); AI data centers driving new high-voltage lines near communities; LED/"smart" lighting suppressing melatonin (AMA 2016) and adding RF transmitters with little safety study. Environmental effects (Q14): Thielens et al. (2018) found insects absorb more RF above 6 GHz, the direction 5G/6G are heading. Levitt, Lai & Manville (2021–22) reviewed reported effects on birds and insects, noting no federal environmental RF standard exists. Sensitive populations (Q11): Children, pregnant women, and implant recipients need separate risk evaluation. France restricted Wi-Fi for under-3 childcare settings in 2015. Disclosure (Q9): Residents deserve public antenna/exposure maps, advance notice before installations near homes and schools, clear device transmission labeling, and a genuine no-fee smart meter opt-out. Research priorities (Qs 10, 16, 17): Fund independent long-term cohort studies with real exposure measurement, especially in children; commission NTP follow-up at current 5G/mmWave frequencies; build a national RF/EMF environmental monitoring network; create an adverse-event reporting pathway; direct FDA to test consumer devices under realistic body-contact conditions. This research must be free of industry funding. Conclusion (Q18): We have deployed unprecedented, involuntary population-wide EMF exposure without proving it safe. Credible research has found cancer signals, DNA damage, oxidative stress, and reproductive effects. I ask HHS to investigate this independently and thoroughly, and prioritize human and environmental health over the pace of commercial deployment.
Posted 2026-09-22#0500 · Permanent link ↗

Cites a European Parliament-commissioned 5G report concerning cancer and reproductive outcomes, and quote…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”
Posted 2026-09-22#0499 · Permanent link ↗

Cites a European Parliament-commissioned 5G report concerning cancer and reproductive outcomes, and quote…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”
Posted 2026-09-22#0498 · Permanent link ↗

Cites a European Parliament-commissioned 5G report concerning cancer and reproductive outcomes, and quote…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”
Posted 2026-09-22#0497 · Permanent link ↗

Requests independent research on cumulative, real-world electromagnetic exposure, health outcomes and env…

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
I am submitting this comment as a concerned member of the public urging HHS to undertake a comprehensive, independent investigation into the potential human and environmental health effects of the rapidly expanding electromagnetic environment created by modern technology. My concern is not based on the assumption that every wireless technology has been proven harmful. Rather, it is that society has dramatically increased the intensity, density, duration, proximity, and variety of electromagnetic exposures while the long-term biological consequences of this cumulative exposure remain incompletely understood. Today, people can be exposed simultaneously and continuously to Wi-Fi, 4G/5G and future 6G infrastructure, cell towers and small cells, Bluetooth and wireless headphones, smartphones, smart meters, wireless cameras and security systems, wearables, smart-home devices, connected and electric vehicles, wireless medical devices, satellite communications such as Starlink, and the rapidly expanding infrastructure supporting AI and data centers. The central question should therefore not simply be whether each individual device complies with an existing exposure limit. HHS should determine whether current standards adequately address real-world, cumulative, lifelong exposure from multiple sources operating simultaneously. I respectfully ask HHS to investigate potential effects on: sleep and circadian biology; hormonal and endocrine function; reproductive health and fertility; pregnancy and fetal development; neurological and cognitive function; immune and metabolic function; oxidative stress and cellular signaling; DNA integrity, repair and epigenetic processes; cancer and other chronic diseases; and children and other potentially vulnerable populations. Research should specifically examine effects that may occur below existing exposure limits and should evaluate frequency, power density, modulation, pulsing, duty cycle, beamforming, proximity to the body, duration, and simultaneous exposure to multiple frequencies. HHS itself identifies these factors as important areas for investigation. I am particularly concerned about involuntary residential exposure. Smart meters, nearby wireless infrastructure, small cells, and other continuously operating devices can expose people inside their own homes regardless of whether they personally choose to use wireless technology. Americans should have meaningful information and reasonable options for reducing unnecessary exposure in their homes, schools, workplaces, and communities. HHS should also investigate the rapidly changing exposure environment created by 5G, future 6G, satellite networks, IoT devices, autonomous vehicles, wireless charging, electric vehicles, smart cities, and other emerging technologies before assuming that older exposure research adequately represents these systems. The investigation should extend beyond human health. HHS should coordinate with appropriate federal agencies to examine potential effects on wildlife, birds, insects, pollinators, livestock, plants, and ecosystems. HHS specifically requests information concerning environmental effects and wireless infrastructure near homes, schools, childcare facilities, workplaces, and livestock. Independent research is essential. Federal research should be transparent, independently replicated, and protected from conflicts of interest. Long-term studies should measure actual exposure rather than relying solely on estimates of device use. The government should develop standardized methods for measuring individual and neighborhood exposure and consider longitudinal health studies, environmental monitoring, occupational monitoring, disease registries, biomonitoring, and adverse-event reporting. I also urge HHS to improve public transparency. Consumers, parents, schools, workers, and communities should have understandable information about the emissions and realistic exposure characteristics of wireless devices and infrastructure. The scientific evidence contains established findings, conflicting findings, emerging research, and significant uncertainty. That uncertainty is not a reason to dismiss public concern; it is a reason to investigate more rigorously. We should neither assume that modern wireless technology is harmless nor assume that every health problem attributed to EMF has been scientifically proven to be caused by EMF. We should measure the exposures, study the biology, monitor health outcomes over time, investigate potential risks, and make the evidence publicly available. The unprecedented proliferation of wireless and electrically powered technology should be matched by an equally serious commitment to understanding its long-term consequences for human health and the environment. I urge HHS to make cumulative, real-world EMF/RF exposure and its potential biological effects a significant federal research priority.
Posted 2026-09-22#0495 · Permanent link ↗

An older caregiver reports years of EMF-related difficulties and limited ability to use a cellphone long …

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
I have been dealing with EMF issues for 6 years now. I'm 76yrs old and have a 90 yr old husband that I have been trying to take care. There is so much to eexplain. But. Unfortunately I can't be on this cell phone long enough. But thank God your doing research. Maybe people like me will get some help with the EMF issues. I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy!

10 comments displayed. More load as you scroll.

These are separate official submissions grouped by topic. A comment can appear in more than one board.