Research & federal duties

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 parent, family member and concerned member of the public. Wireless radiation has negatively affected several people I know and care about over the past 12 years. It has majorly impacted critical areas of their lives such as housing security, employment, school attendance, finances and above all, their physical health and emotional well-being. It is imperative that the HHS assess this issue. It pertains to essential human rights. 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 parent and a highly concerned member of the public. The proper role of government and the agencies created is not to allow corporations or different branches of government to experiment on the citizens. YOUR ROLE IS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM HARM BEFORE EVERYTHING ELSE. It is not acceptable, nor Constitutional, for Congress to give power to an agency that infringes on the rights of the people to be free from what are essentially experiments. Those who suffer impacts already are ignored. A clear example is the entire medical establishment. Medical care has been perverted by sick incentives, and the proposed solutions do not mitigate the harms that have been caused. The same is going on with the FCC and the regulations that prevent towns and cities to negate contracts with companies like Verizon and AT&T—to try and stop the 6G and who knows, eventually 12G?, towers and the constant bathing of people in radiation exposures and wireless pulses.. 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. Private citizen groups comprised of those opposed need to be at the table as we are ultimately the largest stakeholders, and in fact the people that fund all of it. 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. Leadership is not about being in charge. It is about taking care of those in your charge. - Simon Sinek

The science industry is flooded with scientific information concerning this issue of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), radiofrequency (RF) radiation, and wireless radiation exposure and the mere fact that the question continues to be sought for response leads one to believe that there is enough concern to request comments so I appreciate the opportunity in hopes my comments are weighed and taken seriously. HHS/NIH knows already of the emergence of technologies in the arena of humans and health-care and our input requires swift action. As a nation we have embarked upon an experimental era of coexisting with emerging technologies: artificial intelligence, biotechnology, brain computer interface technology, nanotechnology, directed energy, and quantum technology (CRS IF1110). I have become victim subject to dangerous levels of wireless radiation exposure. I can't upload images for evidence because my library of intellectual property containing pictorial works have yet to be properly documented and registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. Emerging technologies coupled with 5G millimeter EMR is the commonality between biology, biotechnology, and IoT wireless connectivity, architectural infrastructures are the backbone of research and experimental development and discovery fueling the 21st Century Bioeconomy. Humans and health-care are inclusive and have become the bedrock foundation harnessing engineered programmable artificial DNA/RNA consumer cellular technologies, operatable only by means of wireless internet of things connectivity. Without the powerful use of radiation electromagnetics, radiofrequency radiation, and influx of internet of things Wi-Fi wireless connectivity devices: antennas, sensors, biosensors, RFID tags, biotechnology and recent developments of chemical technology vaccines coupled with directed energy there would not exist wireless radiation exposure neither could there be excitation operation of these materials, devices, tools and communication infrastructures. With the ongoing deployment of 6G and the coexistence of artificial intelligent in humans, brAIn and health-care transparency and action is required including readdressing current laws such as HHS/NIH 45 CFR Part 46 and EPA 40 Part 26 Protection of Human Subjects (clinical, experimental, and medical research). As a citizen of the United States with extensive knowledge on the direction of Americas' economy, I submit comments on behalf of the general population (particularly the vulnerable); for the good, safety, and welfare of all communities and environments. I demand real commitment to legal framework at the federal and State level to allow regulation of artificial intelligence in humans and the health-care ecosystem and across-industries having direct impact on electronic-magnetic fields, radiofrequency radiation, 5G IoT wireless connectivity instituting real changes to policy governing emerging technologies. No longer can agencies and institutions co-partner, create, develop, deploy, and award investigations and report back to directors and advisory boards to generate agendas, congregate in meetings, sit on webinars and post blogs. Daily the public is being exposed to dangerous levels of electromagnetic radiation radio frequency radiation from wireless device environments. It's not merely a question about "radiation exposure from cellphone" and FDA "SARS limits. Leadership at the FCC does not consist of doctors, patients or scientist but engineers and lawyers. Currently there is no plan or formal scientific consensus within the global medical industry to establish electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) as a medical diagnosis although the World Health Organization acknowledges that symptoms individuals experience are real and can be disabling however controlled "double-blind" studies have consistently shown that affected individuals cannot reliably detect electromagnetic fields. In past history this may have been the scientific conclusion and as a result mainstream medicine treats electromagnetic hypersensitivity as an "idiopathic environmental intolerance" which means symptoms are acknowledge but are not scientifically linked to wireless radiation. Upon legal scrutiny, security, copyright protections and registration and trademark with all rights reserved as the owner of my IP portfolio I will release authenticated photographs to the public. There will be national call to address "the legal and ethical issues that confront society due to artificial intelligence" this includes AI in humans and health-care and implications on privacy, transparency and plain language, consent and documentation of consent, surveillance, bias or discrimination, algorithmic discrimination, data breaches, inaccuracy or mistakes in (AI) procedural protocols, device to device protocols, large scale healthcare cybersecurity / IoT wireless interconnect within an conglomerate electromagnetic radiation environment.

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 mother, wife and member of society. I along with many others am sensitive to EMFs. Headaches and general not feeling well. Please don’t go to 6G as we already have problems. I believe that children’s brains can be affected. Please conduct extensive research before doing anything else for the good of everyone. 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. I am concerned about my own health but especially what happens to children. I have been attempting to protect myself by using emf protection to help reduce radiation. Friends and relatives are doing the same especially those near 5g towers. I limit smart devices and appliances and have no smart phone. 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 would very much like to know why, according to NASA, there is a "man made barrier" or "bubble" of Very Low Frequency radio waves surrounding the entire planet (see link below). Was this created accidentally or incidentally (seems extremely doubtful, but please let us know)? Has this been created intentionally? If so, for what purpose? What kind of effect is this or might this be having on the 6-8 billion inhabitants of the planet? Is the number of people potentially being affected by this perhaps sufficient to demand that these questions be answered in the PUBLIC'S INTEREST? https://www.nasa.gov/missions/van-allen-probes/nasas-van-allen-probes-spot-man-made-barrier-shrouding-earth/

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. When WiFi became popular I was onboard. Shortly afterward I noticed that I no longer felt well on an every day basis. After doing extensive research I discovered that the radiation from WiFi and cellular phones use EMF radiation and is damaging to humans, animals, bees and plants, and every progression, from 3G to 4G and finally 5G (which uses millimeter waves, the same type of waves that are used by the military in their radar and microwave-based and wireless weapons) became more dangerous and more damaging to humans, animals, bees and plants. Once I eliminated the sources of EMF radiation in my home I began to fell better almost immediately and almost immediately my health improved. The industries that profit from this technology has always claimed that the technology was harmless without ever doing honest independent studies to prove what they were saying. The only studies that they quote was VERY HEAVILY and intensionally biased in their favor. When truly independent studies were finally done it debunked that biased studies and honestly and accurately proved that the EMF radiation was without a doubt harmful to humans, animals, bees and plants!!! It is long overdue to heavily regulate this technology and ban the placement of towers and other devices that capture and/or relay this EMF radiation within at least 500 feet of homes, schools and other buildings where people and animals are found and an IMMEDIATE ban and removal of ALL so called Smart Meters that have been installed where people and animals reside MUST be put in place!!! 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 [patient, parent, family member, caregiver, healthcare professional, researcher, advocate, concerned member of the public, or other]. PERSONALIZE YOUR COMMENT HERE: Tell HHS how wireless radiation has affected you, your child, your family, or someone you care about. You may describe the source and duration of the exposure, health effects experienced, when they began, whether reducing exposure made a difference, and how these experiences have affected daily life. If you are an ally, describe why you support people affected by wireless radiation and why you believe HHS should address this issue. 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. HHS should address this issue. 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 was Scientific Director and Scientific Advisor of the Ramazzini Institute in Bologna until 2023, now retired. From 1981 to 2001, I worked closely with Professor Cesare Maltoni, an internationally renowned oncologist; then I was Scientific Director of the same Institute. I am expert in the study of agents that can determine cancers and other environmental pathologies; among them ionizing radiation, low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELFEMF) and radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). I paid particular attention to the issue of the risks related to simultaneous exposure even to small doses of chemicals or physical agents, alone or associated to multiple exposures, especially during embryonic and foetal life, as well as in childhood. I am the principal investigator of the RF-EMF large study performed by the Ramazzini Institute since 2006 up to the publication of data. We published the results of the carcinogenicity study in 2018 (Falcioni et al, 2018)1, when the US NIEHS/NTP technical report on RF-EMF (NTP, 2018)2 was also published. And, surprisingly, using the same experimental model, we obtained the same results: a statistically significant increase in heart schwannomas and an increase in brain gliomas (statistically significant in the NTP study). We studied very low SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) levels, simulating human exposures to radio base station antennas, the NTP studied SAR much higher, and in this case the exposure responses were higher. The two studies were evaluated in the systematic review commissioned by WHO (Mavissen et al, 2025)3 , which concludes.: “The findings of this systematic review indicate that there is evidence that RF EMF exposure increases the incidence of cancer in experimental animals with the CoE being strongest for malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas.” Based on the experimental results cited, and due to the enormous diffusion of radio frequency technologies, I am strongly and scientifically convinced that in assessing risks to the human population, policy makers must at least adopt a principle of caution by lowering exposure to limits compatible with the health of thI was Scientific Director and Scientific Advisor of the Ramazzini Institute in Bologna until 2023, now retired. From 1981 to 2001, I worked closely with Professor Cesare Maltoni, an internationally renowned oncologist; then I was Scientific Director of the same Institute. I am expert in the study of agents that can determine cancers and other environmental pathologies; among them ionizing radiation, low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELFEMF) and radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). I paid particular attention to the issue of the risks related to simultaneous exposure even to small doses of chemicals or physical agents, alone or associated to multiple exposures, especially during embryonic and foetal life, as well as in childhood. I am the principal investigator of the RF-EMF large study performed by the Ramazzini Institute since 2006 up to the publication of data. We published the results of the carcinogenicity study in 2018 (Falcioni et al, 2018)1, when the US NIEHS/NTP technical report on RF-EMF (NTP, 2018)2 was also published. And, surprisingly, using the same experimental model, we obtained the same results: a statistically significant increase in heart schwannomas and an increase in brain gliomas (statistically significant in the NTP study). We studied very low SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) levels, simulating human exposures to radio base station antennas, the NTP studied SAR much higher, and in this case the exposure responses were higher. The two studies were evaluated in the systematic review commissioned by WHO (Mavissen et al, 2025)3 , which concludes.: “The findings of this systematic review indicate that there is evidence that RF EMF exposure increases the incidence of cancer in experimental animals with the CoE being strongest for malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas.” Based on the experimental results cited, and due to the enormous diffusion of radio frequency technologies, I am strongly and scientifically convinced that in assessing risks to the human population, policy makers must at least adopt a principle of caution by lowering exposure to limits compatible with the health of the exposed population, practically the entire population of the globe. See attached file(s)