Research & federal duties

Question 3 Personal experience I first noticed symptoms around 2009, but I did not understand what was causing them. I went to an engineering school that twas known for its connectivity and they recently upgraded the school network, I had to start commuting.
 My symptoms include tingling in my extremities and body; head tension; widespread sustained muscle tightness; brain fog; and fatigue. Over time, I began recognizing a pattern in when they occurred and which environments I could tolerate. From 2012, the problem became more pronounced after I installed one of the faster Wi-Fi routers on the market including dual-band with 5 GHz capability. This created problems, while other wireless environments were tolerable. I lived comfortably for years with older equipment, yet experienced symptoms in particular homes and workplaces.
 In 2020, triggering episodes became more frequent and disruptive with certain routers and some cellular exposures, specifically after the new repeater tower rollout in March 2020. 

More recently, newer phones have become an everyday challenge. The iPhone 17 Pro for example will trigger symptoms within seconds of being within a couple of feet. I have also experienced this response in a blinded test along with other devices. Oddly enough I have no issues with iPhone devices before 15 Pro.
 For these newer phones specifically, cellular triggers symptoms as if its home router, while Wi-Fi-only operation is generally better tolerated. In addition newer Wi-Fi routers and satellite-internet equipment also trigger very very strong episodes (the starlinks are extremely harsh on my system). 

For personal use I obtained was a modifiable router - JRS Eco - and adjusting the beacon setting changed/reduced the intensity of my response, but doesn’t change my issue.
 An encounter of around ten seconds from a strong device can begin a reaction that takes hours to recover from. Continued exposure makes the symptoms build. After leaving, they gradually decline. Fatigue can be the last thing to clear. That said I return to my normal baseline if given space to recover. Severe episodes, recovery can take days.
 When fully recovered, I work, exercise regularly and enjoy an active social life. But repeated episodes can be debilitating: I lose hours of functioning to reactions that took seconds to begin. Recovery does not resolve the disruption of being repeatedly triggered in ordinary environments.
 I work with several medical practitioners, but we have not identified why my body responds this way. We have tried many approaches to help manage recovery, but have not found a reliable way to prevent the reactions.
 Question 5 Exposure assessment Please assess modern cellular handsets, infrastructure, Wi-Fi across generations (including Wi-Fi 6/7) and satellite-internet equipment, covering sub-6 GHz and mmWave exposures. Measure frequency, modulation, pulse rate/timing (important), duty cycle, peak/average power, beamforming, and simultaneous transmissions.
 DO NOT treat absence of tissue heating as a complete answer about safety. Investigate whether membrane properties, sodium/calcium-channel regulation or cellular signaling can be affected independently of heating. Determine whether any changes disrupt normal biological function, particularly in susceptible individuals. Question 11 susceptible populations Investigate susceptibilities or response thresholds that population averages could miss. Document both triggering and tolerated conditions, rapid onset, build-up and declining recovery. Account for normal functioning between episodes; a normal assessment should not automatically end an investigation.
 Question 16 Research/clinical priorities I want research that connects the physical exposure to a biological mechanism and then to a useful treatment. Please investigate: * Changes in voltage-gated calcium & sodium-channel activity. * The membrane–channel interface & factors that could alter channel sensitivity. * Calcium regulation, mitochondrial function and inherited or acquired differences that could affect susceptibility and recovery. (My hypotheses, not mechanisms I claim) 
 Investigate whether susceptibility can be reduced while preserving normal function, with independent replication and transparent reporting. PLEASE develop clinical pathways so patients and their doctors have somewhere useful to turn for evaluation and treatment. Success should mean being able to work, sleep, travel and participate in ordinary environments—not simply recovering faster after leaving them.
 I am not interested in becoming a recluse or living off-grid. I want to live my life. For people experiencing this, the need is not only an answer about exposure standards; it is an explanation of what is happening and a medically useful way to address it. If any clinicians are working on this, my email: curare.90.firs@icloud.com

To whom is may concern, Im relieved at the thought that the impact of Cellular Infrastructure, EMF's, RF Radiation and Wireless Radiation could actually be studied and responded to. Our current laws do not protect us from what modern day technology is exposing us to and consequences of that concern me greatly! We want current research and property safety structures as well as the ability for small local communities and governments to have autonomy and the option to choose where we want to allow cell towers and small cell antennae. Our local board of supervisors has been sued for voting in favor of our community and siding with our concerns of a tower being 100 feet from family homes and close enough to fall on houses. This is awful for the people who live their lives and invest in their homes and community to be denied the right to choose not to have a 150' cell tower just feet from their homes. The fact that health and environmental concerns regarding these technologies cannot be used as evidence or argument to protect our families and environment is criminal. The FCC who benefits financially from these towers should not be in control of laws and regulations surrounding local governmental rights and the rights of a community to choose what we live with. Health effects from EMF's, RF Radiation and Wireless Radiation Exposure NEED to be studied by non-biased groups to that our health and safety can be protected, not profits of parties who benefit from this technology. It's time to protect our children, elders, animals and community as a whole. We don't ask to get rid of these technologies, but to understand their impacts so that we can make informed decisions that protect our safety while still providing people with needed modern technology. Health and safety is paramount!

FCC regulations regarding cell phone towers and cell phones are 30 years old. The technology has advanced considerably since the 1990's, the regulations should as well. There have been numerous long-term studies conducted on all forms of cell phone associated emissions form virtually every first world nation world-wide and the overall consensus is that there is harm to ALL living things based on proximity to the towers and the devices themselves. Stricter regulations have been implemented in dozens of countries based on these long-term studies, yet the United States continues to lag woefully behind. It seems that capitalism and profit trump safety and health. I suggest reading the attached Final Report of the Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology. The FCC's power re: cell phone technology allows the agency to run roughshod on the welfare of the citizens of the United States and it needs to change.

FCC regulations regarding cell phone towers and cell phones are 30 years old. The technology has advanced considerably since the 1990's, the regulations should as well. There have been numerous long-term studies conducted on all forms of cell phone associated emissions form virtually every first world nation world-wide and the overall consensus is that there is harm to ALL living things based on proximity to the towers and the devices themselves. Stricter regulations have been implemented in dozens of countries based on these long-term studies, yet the United States continues to lag woefully behind. It seems that capitalism and profit trump safety and health. I suggest reading the attached Final Report of the Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology. The FCC's power re: cell phone technology allows the agency to run roughshod on the welfare of the citizens of the United States and it needs to change.

• Wireless radiation disrupts lymphocytes by opening calcium channels (VGCC's) in cell membrane and increasing intraceullar Ca2+ (Puri et al, 2019, attached), thereby assisting bacterial and viral infections. • Cell phone radiation impairs DNA repair in lymphocytes https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/1 • After 30 days of exposure time, 1 h/day EMF exposure resulted in significant decrease in immunoglobulin levels (IgA, IgE, IgM, and IgG); total leukocyte, lymphocyte, eosinophil and basophil counts; and a significant increase in neutrophil and monocyte counts. These changes were more increased in the group exposed to 2 h/day EMF. Vitamin D supplementation in EMF-exposed rats reversed these results when compared with EMF-exposed groups. In contrast, 7, 14, and 21 days of EMF exposure produced nonsignificant differences in these parameters among all experimental groups. We concluded that exposure to mobile phone radiation compromises the immune system of rats, and vitamin D appears to have a protective effect. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27901344/ • GSM cell phone radiation microwaves under specific conditions of exposure affected human lymphocytes similar to stress response https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3165836_Nonthermal_GSM_Microwaves_Affect_Chromatin_Conformation_in_Human_Lymphocytes_Similar_to_Heat_Shock • As compared to the control group in the radar operators a statistically significant decrease in the total T8 cell count and a significant increase in the IgM level was found pointing to the radiation induced disorders in lymphocyte system. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2131394/ Read more on effects of wireless radiation and 5G on the immune system https://mdsafetech.org/immune-system/ Studies that shows that wireless radiation affects vitamin D and glutathione: • Marshall 2016 reported wireless radiation lowers vitamin D receptor (VDR) activity by changing the shape of the VDR, thus impairing VDR activity and its ability to bind with vitamin D, and that this effect peaks at just under 6 GHz https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Trevor_Marshall2/publication/305254443_Electrosmog_and_autoimmune_disease/links/5785e9a008ae3949cf546f52.pdf?origin=publication_detail (Wi-Fi uses 2.45 and 5 GHz, but just recently, WiFi using 6 GHz was introduced in 2020 https://blogs.cisco.com/networking/wi-fis-new-6ghz-spectrum-is-a-new-frontier) • Belpomme et al, 2015 reported vitamin D deficiency can result from inflammation caused by chronic wireless radiation exposure http://www.ehs-mcs.org/fichiers/1454070991_Reliable_biomarkers.pdf • Garaj-Vrhovac et. al, 2011 found that radar workers, after 10 years, had glutathione that was more than 50% lower than non-radar workers. “The glutathione concentration in the exposed group was significantly lower than in controls (1.24 vs. 0.53) whereas the concentration of malondialdehyde was significantly higher (1.74 vs. 3.17), indicating oxidative stress. Results suggests that pulsed microwaves from working environment can be the cause of genetic and cell alterations and that oxidative stress can be one of the possible mechanisms of DNA and cell damage.” Results were statistically significant (p<0.05). Average exposure levels for radar workers were no higher than 0.00000835 W/kg, or 8.35 E-6 W/kg, well below government exposure standards (FCC Whole Body SAR limit is 0.08W/kg average.) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1438463910001069 (my highlighted copy attached) • Deluca et al, 2014. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/mi/2014/924184/ found reduced levels of glutathione and impaired detoxification ability in those with microwave sickness (EHS). Risk of EHS development was increased 9.7 times in individuals who are missing two genes GSTM1 and GSTT1, which are glutathione S-transferase (GST) enzymes that detoxify by conjugation with glutathione o a statistically significant lowered level of antioxidant/detoxification enzymatic activity of GST (glutathione S-transferase) in EHS compared to non-EHS (~1.9 in EHS vs. ~2.5 in non-EHS, p=0.000001, see Figure 5a) o a statistically significant increased level of antioxidant/detoxification enzymatic activity of GPX (glutathione peroxidase) in EHS compared to non-EHS (~24.9 in EHS vs. ~22.8 in non-EHS, p=0.012151, see Figure 5b)

• Impact of Radiofrequency on DNA Damage and Antioxidants in Peripheral Blood Lymphocytes of Humans Residing in the Vicinity of Mobile Phone Stations, Zothansiama et al, 2017. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318916428_Impact_of_radiofrequency_radiation_on_DNA_damage_and_antioxidants_in_peripheral_blood_lymphocytes_of_humans_residing_in_the_vicinity_of_mobile_phone_base_stations found that people residing with 80m (~250 ft) of cell phone towers had statistically significant lowered levels of glutathione (p < 0.01) and other antioxidants CAT and SOD (p < 0.001) and statistically significant increased levels of micronuclei (MN) (p < 0.001) and lipid peroxidation (LOO) (p < 0.001) when compared to a control group residing 300m or more away from cell towers was just published in August 2017. The frequencies emitted by the cell towers was between 900MHz and 1800MHz. The RF exposure level for the exposed group was in the range of 2.80–7.52 mW/m2, well under the FCC limit of 10,000 mW/m2. The RF exposure level for the control group was 0.014–0.065 mW/m2, which is at least 100 times lower than the exposure level in the exposed group.

Re: HHS-OASH-2026-0397 — Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure I respectfully submit the attached public comment in response to the September 21, 2026, Request for Information, published at 91 Federal Register 59792–59794. I am a parent of six and a public school educator with 24 years of experience in Los Angeles. My comments represent my individual perspective, not that of my employer. My attached statement addresses Questions 2 and 5–18, with particular attention to children's exposure, wireless technology in educational settings, the adequacy of existing exposure standards, real-world exposure measurements, smart meters (Question 13(k)), long-term health research, environmental effects, and federal research priorities. I request that HHS conduct a rigorous, independent, and transparent scientific review; distinguish established findings from emerging evidence and uncertainty; evaluate potentially sensitive populations; improve public access to reliable exposure information; and develop practical, evidence-based guidance for families, schools, and communities. I recognize the benefits of wireless technology. My request is for scientifically justified public health protections, accurate information, and meaningful oversight. Please include my attached three-page PDF in the official administrative record as my complete public comment. Respectfully submitted, Anura F. Lawson Los Angeles, California

I have multiple sclerosis which produces such varied symptoms that I cannot say with any certainty that my health issues are entirely M.S. related, or are related to constant exposure to EMFs. I do know that my symptoms are worsening and many (such as constant, severe bodily pain, constant digestive issues, memory issues) are not typically M.S. I do have odd neurologic issues, such as neuropathy in legs and feet and cognitive issues which may be related to M.S. or may be related to EMFs. Regardless, persons suffering from chronic disease, such as M.S., should not be exposed to further environmental burdens, such as EMF exposure. So, I urge you to carefully consider the impact EMFs have on society as a whole and especially on those of us already on overload from a serious chronic illness. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a concerned member of the public. At this time, I am not sure if EMF's, RF, and Wireless Radiation Exposure is affecting me, but I do support people affected by wireless radiation. I believe HHS should address this issue because wireless radiation has grown exponentially since it was studied over thirty years ago. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

I happen to be a person who is affected by wireless radiation. When my 36 year old cousin was diagnosed with a Glioblastoma back in 2012 I fell into researching why a disease previously known in older males would suddenly show up in a young mother of two. One hypothetical that was proposed was RF. My cousin had worn a RF headset at her job and the tumor was on the radiating side. So as a young mother myself I chose to (out of an overabundance of caution) limit my family's exposure to cellular, wifi and blutooth in our home. If you've known and loved a person with glioblastoma- you'd do the same. It literally ruined that family- financially, emotionally, in every way possible. My family has gone without RF (and have chosen homes that naturally block neighbors RF signals and cell towers) since then. Nothing fancy really, just being cautious. Oddly enough, or maybe because I spend so much time avoiding it, I am now symptomatic to BT and wifi. It takes several hours of exposure but there have been times when water, electrolytes, and sleep don't touch a headache and inevitably I'll pull out my RF meter just to double check that a device hasn't reset itself and is unknowingly pulsing somewhere in the house. And a surprising amount of time that is just what has happened. We turn it off and the headache resolves. I'm absolutely bewildered by my ability to sense it. Unfortunately, my father this last year also passed from a Glioblastoma. A cell tower was placed across the street from their home several years ago and his bedroom window was in direct line of sight of the antennas. While the neurologist assured us there is no 'genetic' marker (outside of very rare populations) for brain cancers running in families, I can't help but wonder with my sensitivity and two family members passing if we will stumble upon evidence for one in a couple years. Some sign that we are particularly susceptible to the non native wavelengths around us. My big ask here in commenting is two part: 1) Encourage doctors/epidemiologsts to look for the patterns in families and take note of possible RF sources and 2) Give those of us who are sensitive easy ways to protect ourselves from RF: mandate or encourage simple On/off switches for RF on appliances, thermostats, mini splits, car stereo systems, security cameras, etc; encourage/enforce options for opting out of smart meters or encourage posting smart meters off the home/ not near bedrooms with utility companies; Give us accurate tools for locating cell towers and antennas (For example- antenna search dot com shows where the tower is registered (an address), not located. For the tower my father slept across from it says it is a mile away at the HOA building). If a family hoping to avoid living near a tower only looked at the website they would not know there was a tower there unless they had an RF meter. Please give enough credence to the possibility that there is 'possibly something going on here' that medical professionals don't immediately think we're nuts (and therefore driving people into the hands of the medical conmen who 'believe' them). I think what I ask is relatively simple and does not impede those who do want to partake in RF. I'm just asking that those of us who do want to avoid it at least have the ability and option of safeguarding our homes and families. Thank you.