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. As a very concerned mother and now grand-mother and Holistic Health Care Advocate for family, friends and many healing groups I learned already as a young person about all good and harmful Earth Earth radiations. A topic well known to professionals and families in Germany for decades but sadly ignored and even villified and fought over here! Family members and I have always been very sensitive to these radiations, even leading to cancer which had been diagnosed and confirmed by their doctors. I would have a constant headache 24/7 right away and even receive electric shocks by just holding a cell phone--already before the more intense 4G and 5G Smart phones and in addition to those smart Meters and huge cell towers were built!! My search was therefore focused on finding protection from these harmful rays, spending ( investing) initially over $4,000 to protect my home, and so I was always led to more and more inventors who offered devices which could protect us personally from these rays. But people are being kept so ignorant over here and many get so sick and have to suffer needlessly because all their specialists cannot find the cause. Friends of mine here in Co. and in Santa Fe were on their death bed and were given up when they read the book by Arthur Firstenberg which helped them improve but not to full recovery. So, please, do not just follow the money because technology can be created for a higher expense! So I urge you to establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

While EMFs affect all ages, children are uniquely vulnerable and deserve special consideration. They are exposed to wireless radiation at increasingly young ages, often beginning during pregnancy and continuing throughout childhood and adulthood in their homes, schools, communities, and workplaces. The widespread use of screens and wireless devices has become normalized and encouraged, while questions about hazardous, long-term and cumulative exposure effects remain routinely ignored by federal regulatory agencies and government authorities. The FCC’s current RF exposure guidelines were established in 1996 and are fundamentally flawed and outdated. Wireless technology and infrastructure has exploded since the guidelines were introduced, and yet the industry has actively suppressed the extensive body of scientific literature that clearly demonstrates harm to people and the environment. Furthermore, federal regulatory agencies have yet to demonstrate to the public that the FCC’s decades-old RF exposure guidelines adequately protect children, other vulnerable populations and the environment from the risks of exposure. Rather than continuing to dramatically expand population-wide wireless radiation exposure, we should exercise a precautionary approach when it comes to wireless and take this opportunity to thoroughly examine the current state of scientific literature and conduct new studies that appropriately consider the long-term consequences of ubiquitous and cumulative exposure to current and future wireless environments. That means supporting independent research into the health and developmental effects of RF radiation, particularly the effects on children, pregnant women, and other vulnerable populations. Additionally, it is equally critical that federal regulatory agencies are transparent about the body of scientific literature that is used to establish exposure standards, and must ensure that they are based on biologically-relevant models. This scientific literature must be independent of industry influence and any entity that has a financial interest in continued wireless deployment. It is of utmost importance that HHS and other public health agencies play a central role in evaluating the evidence and identifying where research gaps remain. We must not allow yet another generation of children to be harmed by the effects of wireless radiation. For the sake of our children and their future, we must consider independent science, exercise transparency, and implement the necessary protections to make safer, and more responsible decisions about the wireless environment in which they are growing up. I urge HHS to prioritize rigorous, independent, and transparent research into the health and developmental effects of wireless radiation, particularly for children and other vulnerable populations. As wireless technologies become increasingly embedded in our daily lives, we have a responsibility to ensure that their widespread use is guided by sound science and accompanied by safeguards that fully protect children’s health and development.

Why are you science-illiterate dimwits spending taxpayer resources on an extensive scientific investigation that's already been conducted by the WHO? https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2025.109751 Of all the things that are actually of vital concern to Americans, this, given all of the other things that are in desperate need of scientific inquiry, is, to quote Lewis Black, one level beneath "are we eating too much garlic as a people?" You know what I want our tax resources spent on? HIV and AIDS. But what do you ignorant homophobes do? You canceled research funding for it, and now Australia is leading the world in AIDS research. I also want it spent on vaccines, and on the implementation of public health initiatives that target the social determinants of health, and mental health. These programs have a dramatic return on investment for the governments that implement them, and are the primary reason why all other developed nations have better health outcomes than the United States, at a fraction of the cost. How about researching the detrimental effects that toxic masculinity is having on the Department of Defense (only the most fragile of male egos would even consider naming it the "Department of War"), or what impact live-streaming a public execution will have on our society (you might want to crack a book by Foucault... I'll give you a hint, it doesn't go so well for those in power). What would I know about this? I have a Master's of Science, a degree that nobody in leadership roles at the DHHS seems to hold. Ideally, I want Ph.D.s or M.D.s leading the DHHS, not a delusional, roadkill-eating conspiracy theorist who dodges the most basic questions about public health. RFK Jr., You are failing the American people and the world. The United States should be the hub of scientific research, not the laughing stock of it. Nobody should be dying from the measles. You are responsible for these tragedies. Lack of funding in research has resulted in an exodus of scientists, who are being poached by other countries by exploiting your incompetence to entice them to move their labs to a country that will support and fund their research without having to jump through homophobic, racist, bigoted, and pseudoscientific hoops to do so. RESIGN IMMEDIATELY.

For starters please read the books The Body Electric by Robert O Becker and Going Somewhere by Andrew A. Marino. One will see that big tech and big money can suppress information regarding the "potential" detrimental effects of EMFs, RF, etc. on the human body. We need to understand that there is potential for bad effects and allow for personal preference when being exposed to these, as well as being informed about how much we are being exposed to, where and how. Even Russia keeps a lower rate of allowable exposure than the US and most people you would bring this issue up to would regard you as crazy for even mentioning it. We need to better inform as well as have studies performed that one of the parties does not benefit financially from the outcome. Please address this issue, it is huge for human health and wefare.

As a concerned citizen, 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 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 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.

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 parent. Wireless radiation acceptable limits have not been updated since the 90s. This is unacceptable give the rapidly changing landscape of wireless technology. Living and working within 300-500 feet of small cell towers has impacted me and my children with noticeable changes in headache frequency and sleep quality. This is not coincidental, and studies MUST be done. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. 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, caregiver and concerned member of the public. In looking around my community there seems to be a significant increase in brain lesions,cancers in the young, qas well as the elderly. I am concerned that exposure to radio frequency waves/radiation in devices and cell towers are to blame. I would like to see proper studies done as to the effects done separate from the entities who have a profit/money interests. We have children and care for a person who depends on us to make health and safety decisions. Please demand that research be done as to the safety of short and long term exposure Thank you kindly Thomas and Angela Halliday

People who have mold illness and chronic inflammatory response syndrome (CIRS) often report that they also develop EMF sensitivity. Whenever they are near 5G Wi-Fi, cell phone towers, or antennas, they report headaches, brain fog, and fatigue. These symptoms persist until the exposure stops. This significantly affects their quality of life, and many say they stay on 4G because it feels more tolerable and less harsh. Communities have raised concerns, too. In 2019, CBS Sacramento reported that parents at Weston Elementary in Ripon, California, blamed a cell tower on campus after a fourth student there was diagnosed with cancer, including a student with brain cancer ("Parents Blame Elementary School's Cell Tower After 4th Student Diagnosed With Cancer," March 12, 2019). The tower was removed. There are also reports that a researcher in Switzerland found mold released more mycotoxins when exposed to EMF. The experiment is unpublished but is often cited by German doctor Dietrich Klinghardt. People who are sensitive to mold and mycotoxins may be more affected as cell towers and base stations are placed near where people live, work, and go to school. While wireless communication is important, it should not come at the cost of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Americans trying to go to school, work, or live safely in their homes. Many are exposed constantly and may not connect their symptoms to the frequencies around them. I ask that unbiased scientific research be done, independent reports be aggregated, and accommodations be considered for people with these sensitivities. 6G should be put on hold and not released until this is studied further and 5G may need to be rolled back to 4G. Thank you for your attention to this. I am a concerned citizen and I hope something can be done to protect people's health and quality of life.