Research & federal duties

Hi, need to slow down, reverse too many EMF transmission towers, smart devices, wifi. Personal health, when around multiple towers, I develop terrible brain fog. Government needs to study EMF for cognitive decline. Thank you.

Since its founding in 2007, Environmental Health Trust and numerous experts and expert groups have repeatedly advised governments, through docket filings and briefings of Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and other officials, that science-based policy updates are urgently needed to reduce microwave-radiation exposure, especially for young children and the environment. According to Common Sense Media, forty percent of U.S. two-year-olds own some form of two-way microwave-radiating tablet. Outdated 20th century approaches such as those relied on by ICNIRP cannot provide valid means for evaluating fast-moving 21st century technologies. At the same time, the recent issuance of separate requests for information by both HHS and the FCC highlights the lack of a coherent federal policy framework. It also reflects the ongoing tension between the Department of Commerce's technology leadership, which is tasked with accelerating wireless deployment, and HHS and FDA officials, who are responsible for evaluating the evidence, supporting research on potential health risks, and advising the FCC on appropriate regulatory policies. Microwave-radiating devices can provide social, safety, and economic benefits, but their risks have not been adequately considered in standards governing manufacture, testing, use, surveillance, and disposal. Consequently, billions experience repeated, avoidable RF radiation through lifetime use of simultaneously operating phones, tablets, personal monitors, and other two-way microwave-radiating devices, increasing risks of chronic illnesses documented over five decades, much of the research conducted outside the U.S. We therefore welcome the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and FCC Request for Information (RFI) on health and environmental impacts. This compendium of selected recent studies (2020-26) on the impact of microwave radiation on human health and the environment completed since the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia ruled in Environmental Health Trust et al. v. FCC, 2021, in response to queries within the RFI from HHS. In response to question 5, we note that current standards for cell phones and other two-way microwave-emitting devices are based largely on studies conducted to avoid heating a small number of rats and mice more than 30 years ago. These outdated standards primarily seek to prevent thermal (heating) effects in the body of a tall adult male and do not reflect exposure patterns experienced by billions of children and smaller-bodied individuals worldwide. They also do not account for the substantial body of research showing adverse effects of microwave radiation on plants, insects, birds, migratory species, mammals, and the ecosystems on which life depends. Phonegate Alert contends that current phone radiation tests, like diesel-engine tests, are fraudulent. We concur. As a result of these efforts, the European Union recently changed its test protocol to 0mm distance from the body. We advise that more stringent exposure limits in high tech nations is evidence per se of the need to update 3-decade old U.S. standards. Response to HHS Request for Information HHS-OASH-2026-0397, HHS-OASH-2026-0397-0001, 2026-19252 Devra Davis PhD, MPH, Fellow American College of Epidemiology, Fellow Collegium Ramazzini, Founder and Acting President, Environmental Health Trust, former Honorary Professor Medicine, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, former Professor of Medicine, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine and elsewhere Introduction Since its founding in 2007, Environmental Health Trust and numerous experts and expert groups have repeatedly advised governments, through docket filings and briefings of Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and other officials, that science-based policy updates are urgently needed to reduce microwave-radiation exposure, especially for young children and the environment. According to Common Sense Media, forty percent of U.S. two-year-olds own some form of two-way microwave-radiating tablet. Outdated 20th century approaches such as those relied on by ICNIRP cannot provide valid means for evaluating fast-moving 21st century technologies. Consequently, billions experience repeated, avoidable RF radiation through lifetime use of simultaneously operating phones, tablets, personal monitors, and other two-way microwave-radiating devices, increasing risks of chronic illnesses documented over five decades, much of the research conducted outside the U.S. This compendium of selected recent studies (2020-26) on the impact of microwave radiation on human health and the environment completed since the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia ruled in Environmental Health Trust et al. v. FCC, 2021, in response to queries within the RFI from HHS.

Public Comment on EMF, RF Radiation, and Wireless Technology
Docket No. HHS-OASH-2026-0397 I am concerned about the rapid expansion of wireless technology and its potential effects on our health, homes, and natural environment. Cell towers, Wi-Fi, smart meters, and wireless devices have become widespread, yet I believe the public needs more independent research, transparency, and meaningful input into decisions affecting our communities. I have personally experienced headaches, nausea, feeling unwell, neck and chest tightness, and ringing in my ears in situations where I believe electromagnetic fields or wireless technology may be relevant. I have noticed discomfort near high-voltage power lines and when using my computer over Wi-Fi. At home, I have noticed a significant difference when using Ethernet with Wi-Fi turned off. I have also noticed significant differences when my phone's Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and hotspot are enabled versus disabled or when it is in airplane mode. My hand can feel hot and tingly when I hold my phone for an extended period. I recognize these observations do not prove that electromagnetic exposure causes my symptoms. Other factors may contribute. However, I believe these experiences deserve consideration and that independent research should investigate the questions they raise. Electromagnetic fields and radio frequency emissions can be measured. I would like greater public access to reliable exposure measurements and clear explanations of safety standards, the evidence behind them, and remaining uncertainties. Research should distinguish between low-frequency fields associated with electrical infrastructure and radio frequency emissions from wireless communications. I am also concerned about how quickly wireless infrastructure has expanded. Cell towers and antennas are appearing on schools, atop small apartment buildings, and on large towers next to homes. These structures change our neighborhoods and natural landscapes. Smart meters and other wireless technologies have also become increasingly common. I do not recall being meaningfully consulted about this expansion or given a clear opportunity to understand the trade-offs. We should ask who is driving this expansion and who benefits financially. What interests and incentives influence the companies and institutions promoting these technologies? Why is there such strong pressure to expand them, often with little public discussion of alternatives or long-term consequences? Are public health and environmental protection receiving the same attention as commercial interests and economic growth? The public deserves transparent, evidence-based answers. I believe we should protect the natural world and carefully consider the visual, environmental, and potential ecological effects of infrastructure. Technology should not automatically be considered beneficial simply because it is newer or more convenient. Wired alternatives deserve consideration, too. Ethernet provides internet access without Wi-Fi transmissions from a local network. Where practical, wired options should be considered. The public should also receive clear information about smart meters, their communication methods, applicable standards, and available alternatives. I respectfully ask HHS to: 1. Support independent research into potential health effects and symptoms reported by people concerned about EMF and RF exposure. 2. Improve access to exposure measurements and clear explanations of safety standards and scientific uncertainties. 3. Examine real-world exposure conditions in homes, schools, workplaces, and communities. 4. Provide information about reducing unnecessary wireless transmissions and using wired alternatives where practical. 5. Investigate potential ecological effects and consider environmental protection when evaluating technology. 6. Promote public participation and transparency about infrastructure decisions and the financial interests involved. 7. Review guidance as credible new scientific evidence becomes available. I am not claiming that my experiences prove a causal relationship between wireless exposure and my symptoms. I am asking that these concerns be investigated fairly. The public deserves reliable information and a meaningful voice in decisions affecting our surroundings. We should be able to evaluate technology critically while protecting health, personal choice, and the natural world. Thank you for considering my comments.

I support HHS and their efforts to conduct a study on the dangers of EMF radiation to the public. This investigation and/or study is many years past due. Citizens already have been severely harmed by EMF radiation which has been completely ignored. More strict steps and regulations need to be placed in our country to prevent dangerous harm to our children and adults. Thank you taking the time to read this comment!

I support HHS and their efforts to conduct a study on the dangers of EMF radiation to the public. This investigation and/or study is many years past due. Citizens already have been severely harmed by EMF radiation which has been completely ignored. More strict steps and regulations need to be placed in our country to prevent dangerous harm to our children and adults. Thank you taking the time to read this comment!

I've noticed that whenever I'm near a Wi-Fi router, I experience heart palpitations, body aches, a buzzing sensation in my head, and brain fog. Interestingly, when I turn off the Wi-Fi, these symptoms seem to disappear. I've observed this pattern repeatedly, and I'm concerned about what might be causing it. I would appreciate more research and attention being given to experiences like mine.

Our children are increasingly surrounded by electromagnetic fields (EMFs), radiofrequency (RF) radiation, and wireless radiation from cell phones, Wi-Fi networks, tablets, and other connected devices, often with no consideration for the potential long-term consequences of continuous exposure. The full health implications of chronic exposure—particularly for developing children—remains largely unknown and requires ongoing in-depth scientific investigation. The stakes are obviously too high to assume that everyday exposure is entirely without risk, and with the widespread and rapidly increasing presence of these exposures, legitimate and critical questions are raised that deserve urgent research and public attention. Children’s developing brains and bodies clearly warrant special consideration, and as such we cannot afford to dismiss unanswered questions. We have a responsibility to investigate potential dangers, demand transparent scientific research, and take warranted precautionary measures to reduce unnecessary exposure and protect the health and future well-being of our most important population: our children.

I have been moderately sensitive to EMFs and RF for many years. I first became conscious of this on moving out of my parents' house which was situated near a 275KV electric pylon. I moved six miles away but on returning at the weekends etc., I noticed an unhealthy influence in their house. Later, in the 2000s, I noticed feeling ill when using computers. Later, while working as a healthcare assistant in hospitals and nursing homes, I started to notice feeling unwell when near to WiFi modem/routers and DECT telephones. I am involved in public understanding of science work, including presenting talks and workshops about radio technology and associated health effects. The problem of sensitivity to these influences is much greater than most people recognise. However, when one starts to directly ask people if they are affected, many do recount their own stories of health problems. In my educational work in the U.K. and Ireland, I notice a distinct unwillingness for educational and health authorities to attempt to educate the public about reducing exposure to radio frequency radiation. The attitude appears to be that any such education would indicate an admission from those authorities that there are real health problems involved. The situation as it stands is that the levels of radiation keep on rising, with none of the authorities taking any responsibility to moderate behaviours. With kind regards Malin Starrett

There are indications that humans possess a magnetic sense. Since this is a fact that has not yet shifted the scientific paradigm, we must rely on current knowledge. Is it ethical to turn a deaf ear? Canaries were used to ensure the safety of mines. We have “canaries” who can speak and write, but our current worldview prevents us from listening to them. It’s ethical to consider this line of thinking. What if people had a magnetic sense? What would change then? What should be studied in that case? What should be taken into account? What should be done differently? What should be done when it is a known fact that all senses function in such a way that there are people in the population whose particular sense is more sensitive than the average? We are familiar with hyper-tasters, people with hypersensitivity to sound, people with sensitivity to light, etc. Is it ethically right, then, to design living environments in such a way that a sensitive person cannot find refuge from the very factor that causes their sensitivity and symptoms? Magnetic sensitivity could affect neurological symptoms, such as dizziness, headaches, or sleep disturbances, especially in technology-rich environments. Doctors might begin to assess magnetic sensitivity as part of a neurological examination, particularly in patients with unexplained symptoms. A new medical specialty might emerge—such as “magneto-neurology”—that focuses on the effects of magnetic fields on the human nervous system. Current safety limits (e.g., SAR values for MRI machines) are based on tissue heating and electromagnetic effects. If magnetic sensitivity were recognized, restrictions might also be imposed based on neurological effects. Henshaw, D. L., & Philips, A. (2024). A mechanistic understanding of human magnetoreception validates the phenomenon of electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS). International Journal of Radiation Biology , 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2024.2435329   Open Access article. There must be a proper scientific explanation to my symptoms. I have other theories also than magnetoreception. Reseachers should find the truth and explanations. I have symptoms: pains that come and go, pain in everywhere : ears, fingers, legs, teeth, tongue. Skin burning. I can't hear properly when I am exposed to too much radiation. I can't sleep since my neighbour watches smart-TV at night and my body resonates with the wireless technology used. My blood sample shows that I have become allergic. Elevated allergy year through even though I am supposed to have symptoms only when trees blossom in spring. It feels all of a suddend that air is really cold eventhough I know it's completely normal. Wireless radiation feels like the air is polluted and dangerous. Please do something to wifi and base town radiation. No wireless sensors, no wireless meters for water consuption monitoring and so on. I deserve to live a normal life but I live inside nightmare.

https://www.scielo.br/j/jmoea/a/hS9VJvKddrTsTtyqLrVdNZx/?lang=en "...While the maximum simulated psSAR values are below the recommended limits, it is observed that, in some classroom arrangements, the psSAR can be substantially increased (e.g., up to 26 dB in the back) comparing to just one student with his laptop. One objective of this study is to provide guidelines for the design of safer classrooms in the context of widespread laptop usage."