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 concerned member of the public. 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.

It is very harmful and all intellectually honest know it. There should be no need for public comment. Evidence of harms is abundant.

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, and concerned member of the public. For many years, I believe I have experienced insomnia, extreme agitation, depression, anxiety due to wireless radiation. My husband has experienced acoustic neuroma and meningioma which we believe is due to wireless radiation. We do not have WiFi in our home and instead use landlines for computer internet connection. But, we have no control over our neighbors' use of WiFi or cellular antennas. I believe much more research and the accurate publishing of research results MUST be made completely clear to the public. On mainstream channels, not buried in a little read or known source. 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.

One major gap in EMF research is that we keep asking what electromagnetic frequencies do to human cells while largely ignoring what they may do to the microbes living inside the human body. Humans are not biologically sterile. We carry complex communities of bacteria, fungi, viruses & other microorganisms throughout the gut, lungs, mouth, skin & other tissues. These organisms influence immune function, inflammation, metabolism, neurotransmitter activity, barrier integrity & overall biological stability. If electromagnetic exposure can alter microbial growth, metabolism, oxidative stress responses, gene expression, biofilm behavior or fungal activity, then EMFs may affect human health indirectly as well as directly. That creates a much larger biological pathway: EMF exposure → microbial stress response → altered microbial metabolism & behavior → altered metabolites, inflammatory signaling & oxidative stress → immune dysregulation, neurological effects & systemic illness. This may be especially important with fungi because fungi respond dynamically to environmental stress & are capable of producing powerful secondary metabolites, including mycotoxins. Research should examine whether chronic RF/EMF exposure can influence fungal growth, sporulation, biofilm formation, virulence or secondary metabolite production both inside the human body & within water-damaged indoor environments. The human body should therefore be studied as a complete biological ecosystem, not as isolated human cells. We may actually be looking at two systems being exposed simultaneously: the human host & the microbial ecosystem living within that host. Those systems continuously interact. A relatively weak environmental signal would not necessarily need to directly destroy human tissue to create a substantial biological effect if that signal changes the behavior of organisms capable of replication, communication, biofilm formation & chemical production. This is why HHS should investigate the intersection of bioelectromagnetics, microbiology, mycology, mycotoxicology, neuroscience, immunology & microbiome science. The question should no longer be only: “What do electromagnetic fields do to human cells?” We also need to ask: “What do electromagnetic fields do to the microorganisms living inside us, & what do those microorganisms then do to the human body?” Until that interaction is properly investigated, we may be studying only half of the biological picture.

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 healthcare professional. I have had a dramatic increase in younger patients suffering from affective disorders and have seen or heard of more autistic children. I did have one patient in his 30’s develop a primary brain cancer from approximately 20 years ago who stated he was on his cell phone constantly and on the same side developed the cancer. He blamed his cell phone use and did expire. After reviewing the early studies regarding EMF’s some time ago I recall being left with the thought there has to be more research considering the unexplained increases in disease occurring. I 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.

Dear Sir/Madam, 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 healthcare professional. Having read Dr Devra Davis' Book, "Disconnect" over a decade ago, I experimented on wireless radiation and its effects on me and my family (two young boys aged 1 and 4 years young). The source is our WiFi, which went left on over night seriously affected our circadian rhythms. Our children often woke up sleep walking and sometimes having a nightmare. I often found myself having to go to the toilet once or twice a night, but at my young age of 39 I have no bladder challenges. The exciting news was, once we turned our WiFi off, no more sleep disturbances and no more bathroom visits! We also chose to turn our phones off before retiring and found that not staring at a bright screen before bed presented us with an improved sleep pattern. We personally believe HHS needs to address this issue and as you'll be aware the World Health Organisation regards 'dirty electricity' which includes cells phones and WiFi as a possible carcinogen and we you believe HHS should address this issue. https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d3483 https://ehtrust.org/science/whoiarc-position-on-wireless-and-health/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8548725/Mobile-phones-possibly-carcinogenic-say-World-Health-Organisation-experts.html 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. Yours in health, sincerely Magnus Mulliner

**Personal Statement: Wireless Smart Meter, RF Exposure Concerns and Forced Enforcement in My Home** **Submitted by:** Snöfrid **Country:** Sweden **Docket:** HHS-OASH-2026-0397 I am a private individual in Sweden submitting my personal experience concerning a dispute with Vattenfall, my electricity network operator, over the installation of an electricity meter with wireless radiofrequency (RF) communications. **I did not refuse electricity metering or the replacement of my meter.** I reported my electricity consumption, submitted meter readings and paid for the electricity I used. My objection concerned the active wireless communications transmitter proposed for installation inside my home. I requested a wired alternative that would allow accurate measurement without this wireless transmitter. I have a hearing impairment and need written communication. On 21 January 2025, I informed a Vattenfall technician by text message that I have hearing loss and communicate through text. I wanted to discuss the technical solution, but my need for accessible written communication and my objection to wireless transmission were treated as part of a refusal to cooperate. On 7 October 2026, an enforcement operation took place at my home. According to my home surveillance recordings, representatives of the Swedish Enforcement Authority (Kronofogden), Vattenfall personnel, a locksmith and uniformed police officers were present. The recordings show activity between approximately 9:35 a.m. and 10:48 a.m. The rear balcony door lock cylinder was drilled out and replaced. On 3 October 2026, I had contacted the police in writing to raise concerns about the planned operation and explain that I was not refusing a meter replacement as such, but objecting to the wireless communications solution. The police replied on 5 October 2026, treating the matter as a contractual issue concerning access. I am concerned that my written warning, hearing impairment and request for a wired alternative were not adequately considered before this serious intervention in my home. I understand that the legality of the enforcement operation must be assessed by the competent Swedish authorities. I submit this account as my personal experience, not as a legal determination by HHS. **RF exposure and consumer choice** The proposed meter was described to me as having a wireless communications module using a mobile network. I was concerned about having an active RF transmitter inside my home and about repeated or ongoing wireless transmissions. This statement does not claim to prove that RF exposure caused a particular medical condition in my case. It documents my concern about exposure and my wish to avoid unnecessary wireless transmission in my home. I respectfully ask HHS to consider: 1. The actual transmission characteristics and exposure patterns of wireless smart meters, including those using mobile networks. 2. Clear public information about frequencies, transmission patterns and relevant exposure measurements. 3. Independent research into long-term and cumulative RF exposure, distinguishing established scientific findings from reported experiences and unresolved questions. 4. The feasibility of wired or non-transmitting alternatives for consumers who request them. 5. Accessible written communication and fair procedures for consumers with hearing impairments. 6. The consequences for residential privacy and personal dignity when disputes over wireless technology result in forced entry into a home. **Conclusion** My position is straightforward: I did not seek to avoid electricity metering. I reported and paid for my electricity consumption and requested a wired solution instead of an active wireless communications transmitter inside my home. I ask HHS to consider my experience in its review of RF exposure, wireless smart meters, consumer choice and practical ways to reduce unnecessary exposure. I support careful, independent scientific investigation and transparent discussion of both established evidence and questions that remain unresolved. Submitted in good faith as a personal account. **Snöfrid** Private individual, Sweden

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. People are affected by wireless radiation whether they are aware of it or not. It has never been properly studied and should never have been approved for use without proper unbiased safety studies. I believe HHS should address this issue before the planned 6G rollout. I don't believe "technological progress" should be allowed to supersede the health of people and the planet. 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. You likely know about the Clinton administration's 1992 Telecommunication Act. Prior to it being passed, telecommunication companies were prohibited from building cell towers within close proximity of schools, hospitals, medical clinics, day care and senior care centers. Why? Because strong Wi Fi (RF radiation) is not healthy. It is radiation. Human bodies perceive it as a foreign body and our immune system responds. Eventually our immune system fatigues and our bodies inflammatory response leads to disfunctions like diabetes and cancers. The passing of the 1992 Telecommunication Act rescinded that protection. How is it we knew to put protections in place, for our most vulnerable populations, and then pretended we did not know? Politics, greed and ignorance. You see the ill effects of strong Wi Fi (RF radiation) in your friends, families and neighbors every day. RF radiation stresses the nervous system, the immune system and eventually erodes good health. The statistics of alarming numbers of what were rare cancers are indisputable. There are volumes of reliable independent research on the damaging effects of RF radiation. If we do not have our good health nothing else matters. You were put in the position to act on behalf of yourself, your family, friends and country in this serious matter. I pray that you have the clarity, courage and wisdom to put reasonable safeguards in place. Thank you for 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 know several people who have been adversely effected by EMF's. Especially from smart meters. This technology needs to be better tested for potential harm it does to the human body. Even subtle disturbance should be taken under consideration. Who knows the long term effects of those subtle frequencies and how it can add up to the cause of this cronically ill nation. 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. Stevn Forman