Research & federal duties

Comment on Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397: Request for Information on EMFs, RF Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure Question 2: Perspective I am submitting this comment as an individual who experiences adverse symptoms from exposure to wireless radiation and other electromagnetic fields. Question 3: Personal Experience a. Sources: I react to cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, 5G, smart meters, wireless printers, and other smart or wireless devices. c. Symptoms: When exposed, I experience heart palpitations, elevated blood pressure, headaches, dizziness, nausea, disorientation, and elevated and erratic blood sugar. f. Steps taken to reduce exposure: I have no wireless internet or any kind of wireless device in my home other than a 4G cell phone for emergencies, which is kept off all of the time unless needed. Avoiding exposure has reshaped nearly every part of my life: Work: I cannot work anywhere other than at home. Housing: I cannot live in apartments or near other houses, buildings, or cell towers. Finding a safe home is becoming harder every year as wireless infrastructure expands. Transportation: I drive a 2003 vehicle because I cannot ride in most modern cars, which are full of wireless systems. Public life: I cannot stay in public places for long, and I cannot spend much time in the homes of friends and family. Healthcare and government services: I have had to walk out of medical appointments and appointments in government buildings because I became too sick to stay. Hospitals are among the hardest places for me to be. During one hospital stay, doctors did not understand why I became sicker and sicker until they realized that a wireless heart monitor was the cause and I improved once it was removed. However, the exposure usually comes from so many different sources in the building and the other equipment that the exposure cannot be removed or lowered enough. Because of this, I have had to avoid hospital stays or leave earlier than my doctors recommended. This is a serious problem when I need medical care. This is not a minor inconvenience. It limits my ability to earn a living, find housing, use transportation, receive medical care, access government services, and maintain relationships. Question 13(j) and Question 11(d) and (f): Wireless Medical Devices My doctor prescribed medical equipment that I cannot use because it relies on Bluetooth. As medical devices increasingly become wireless by default, people who react to RF exposure are being shut out of care they need. Wired or non-wireless alternatives should remain available for medical devices, and patients should be told whether a device emits RF and whether its wireless functions can be turned off. Question 11: Sensitive Populations Yes, exposure assessment should differ for sensitive populations. In addition to children and pregnant women, HHS should recognize people who experience symptoms from RF/EMF exposure as a population that needs specific study and protection (11g). Case reports have documented people developing symptoms after nearby 5G installations [18], and studies of people living near cell towers have reported symptoms such as headache, dizziness, and sleep problems [19, 20], as well as changes in blood sugar [25]. Children absorb more RF radiation into their brains and bodies than adults do [1, 2, 21]. Prenatal exposure has been linked to neurodevelopmental and behavioral changes in animals [3], and RF exposure has been associated with effects on memory performance in adolescents [4]. Question 12: Evidence of Effects Below Current Limits Current federal limits were set in 1996 and are based mainly on heating. Research has reported biological effects at levels below these limits, including oxidative stress [5], DNA damage [6, 7, 8], reproductive harm [9, 10, 11, 12], and tumors in animals exposed over their lifetimes [13]. Reviews conclude that non-thermal effects are not accounted for by current limits [14, 22, 23]. Question 14: Environmental Effects RF radiation may also affect wildlife, including bird and insect orientation and insect exposure at higher frequencies [15, 16, 17]. Recommendations [24] 1. Fund independent research on long-term and cumulative exposure. 2. Develop science-based exposure limits that account for non-thermal effects. 3. Require safety testing of wireless devices before they go on the market, and track health problems after. 4. Improve oversight and enforcement of exposure limits. 5. Reduce exposures for children, vulnerable groups, and wildlife. 6. Require wired or non-wireless options for medical devices. 7. Create low-EMF areas in hospitals, medical offices, and government buildings. 8. Require clear disclosure of RF emissions from devices, vehicles, and infrastructure. References are provided in the attached PDF.

I am a Software Engineer, IT consultant and business owner, living in south of Sweden. Discovered my sensitivity from wireless tech (RF/microwaves) in 2006, shortly after moving into an apartment that had mobile base station antennas located very close nearby. I did not notice these antennas until after I started having recurring headaches, disturbed sleep, and many other symptoms, and started investigating possible causes. Mobile phone operator Telia made an on site measuring audit showing around 8mW/As soon as I left the apartment the symptoms quickly disappeared. I have been working with computers pretty much all my life and also did my military service in radar (air force) and my own theory is that I have been sensitized as a consequence of long-term exposure over many years. Today I live in the house in the countryside working remotely via fiber connection and usually do not experience any symptoms unless I use my mobile phone or other wireless tech more extensively (which is very tempting because of my profession). I have read lots of scientific studies over the years and some illustrates the problem especially well, such as the Spanish study on the Effects of Electromagnetic Fields from Phone Masts on a Population of White Stork (by Balmori A, https://doi.org/10.1080/15368370500205472), that show with rather high significance that the birds with nests nearer to the phone base station antennas have increased likeliness problems with nesting and reproduction. My own measurements of RF radiation over the years consists of different measuring devices ranging from simpler meters such as Cornet ED88T to more advanced devices such as Gigahertz Solutions HF59b.

Comment from EHS Association in Denmark (EHS-Foreningen – https://ehsf.dk) The Danish EHS Association represents people who experience adverse health effects from a wide variety of EMF and RF-EMF emitting sources. The association currently have around 500 members. Adverse health effects (insomnia, heart palpitations, headache, migraine, restlessness in the body, fatigue, cognitive issues (brain fog, memory issues, etc.), burning skin, nausea, dizziness, joint pain, pain in organs, tinnitus, stress and more) are often reported by members to be related to: - Cell towers - Wi-Fi routers and devices - Bluetooth devices - Cellphones and smartphones - Wireless speakers - Smart meters - High-voltage cables in the ground - PV solar inverters - Robotic lawnmowers with active boundary wires - Induction and microwave cooking - EV charging stations and EV´s - Dirty electricity - Stray currents - "Regular" 50 Hz electrical fields or EMF from wires, household appliances, and electronics such as TVs, stereos, computers, etc. (some members turn everything off at night, or do not have electricity in their homes at all) Members also experience specific settings as being particularly often related to adverse health effects, such as: - Being in crowds in general: cinemas, concerts, family gatherings and more (many people = many cellphones = high exposure) - Using public transport such as buses, trains and boats (a closed metal box + many cellphones = high exposure) - Being in hospitals (WiFi, Bluetooth, DECT phone systems, Wireless medical equipment and many people) - Being in airports (many people with cellphones, wearables, etc. + radar) - Flying - Beaches and harbours with radar nearby Recommendations: 1. Inform general practitioners that they should register and notify the HHS (e.g. via an online form) when a patient reports adverse health effects related to EMF or RF-EMF exposure. To our knowledge, nothing is being systematically reported or registered when patients discuss these issues with their practitioner. We are sometimes contacted by affected individuals because nurses at clinics recommend contacting us. 2. Initiate a survey among general practitioners to provide an estimate of how often patients report having EMF or RF-EMF-related issues. 3. Set up an online form in which people who personally experience adverse health effects related to EMF or RF-EMF exposure can state which symptoms (headache, insomnia, dizziness, etc.) they experience and in which settings (scrolling on a smartphone, staying somewhere close to a cell tower, traveling by bus/train, going to a concert, etc.). 4. Make general information about how to lower exposure when using a cellphone widely available to the public. This is a brochure with the Scandinavian countries' precautionary recommendations when using a cellphone: https://foreninglet-cms-files.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/4244/xZ3LDeGaQmzZ.pdf Thank you for providing individuals, families, health care providers, researchers and scientists an opportunity to be heard on this critical public health issue. The board EHS-Foreningen - The Danish EHS Association kontakt@ehsf.dk https://ehsf.dk

I am submitting this comment as a resident of Paris, France, living near a site hosting multiple mobile phone base stations. My purpose is not to provide a scientific conclusion but to present information that may be relevant to the HHS and FCC's review of real-world RF exposure issues. In my residence, concerns have arisen regarding exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from nearby telecommunications antennas. Independent measurements commissioned by me reported significantly higher exposure levels than those previously identified through an official measurement process. French authorities, through the Agence Nationale des Fréquences (ANFR), informed me that an official measurement performed in my residence on 25 January 2024 resulted in a global exposure level of 4.29 V/m and concluded that the installation complied with the applicable French regulations. The ANFR stated that this value was below the 6 V/m threshold used at that time to identify an atypical exposure situation. However, subsequent measurements obtained independently reported substantially higher values, including measurements reaching approximately 30 V/m according to the documentation submitted to the French authorities. Because of this discrepancy between the official measurement and the subsequent measurements, I believe that additional attention should be given to: Real-world residential exposure conditions near wireless infrastructure; Variability of exposure levels over time; Measurement methodologies and their limitations; Long-term exposure assessment in occupied dwellings; Transparency and reproducibility of exposure measurements. For transparency, I am submitting both the independent measurement report and the response received from the ANFR. I respectfully request that the FCC consider situations where different measurement campaigns may produce significantly different results and evaluate whether additional research or monitoring could help improve public understanding of residential RF exposure. The existence of materially different measurement results in the same dwelling illustrates why ongoing scientific review and independent verification remain important for public confidence in RF exposure assessments. Thank you for considering this information.

I am submitting this comment as a resident of Paris, France, living near a site hosting multiple mobile phone base stations. My purpose is not to provide a scientific conclusion but to present information that may be relevant to the FCC's review of real-world RF exposure issues. In my residence, concerns have arisen regarding exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from nearby telecommunications antennas. Independent measurements commissioned by me reported significantly higher exposure levels than those previously identified through an official measurement process. French authorities, through the Agence Nationale des Fréquences (ANFR), informed me that an official measurement performed in my residence on 25 January 2024 resulted in a global exposure level of 4.29 V/m and concluded that the installation complied with the applicable French regulations. The ANFR stated that this value was below the 6 V/m threshold used at that time to identify an atypical exposure situation. However, subsequent measurements obtained independently reported substantially higher values, including measurements reaching approximately 30 V/m according to the documentation submitted to the French authorities. Because of this discrepancy between the official measurement and the subsequent measurements, I believe that additional attention should be given to: Real-world residential exposure conditions near wireless infrastructure; Variability of exposure levels over time; Measurement methodologies and their limitations; Long-term exposure assessment in occupied dwellings; Transparency and reproducibility of exposure measurements. For transparency, I am submitting both the independent measurement report and the response received from the ANFR. I respectfully request that the FCC consider situations where different measurement campaigns may produce significantly different results and evaluate whether additional research or monitoring could help improve public understanding of residential RF exposure. The existence of materially different measurement results in the same dwelling illustrates why ongoing scientific review and independent verification remain important for public confidence in RF exposure assessments. Thank you for considering this information.

I am submitting this comment as a resident of Paris, France, living near a site hosting multiple mobile phone base stations. My purpose is not to provide a scientific conclusion but to present information that may be relevant to the HHS's review of real-world RF exposure issues. In my residence, concerns have arisen regarding exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from nearby telecommunications antennas. Independent measurements commissioned by me reported significantly higher exposure levels than those previously identified through an official measurement process. French authorities, through the Agence Nationale des Fréquences (ANFR), informed me that an official measurement performed in my residence on 25 January 2024 resulted in a global exposure level of 4.29 V/m and concluded that the installation complied with the applicable French regulations. The ANFR stated that this value was below the 6 V/m threshold used at that time to identify an atypical exposure situation. However, subsequent measurements obtained independently reported substantially higher values, including measurements reaching approximately 30 V/m according to the documentation submitted to the French authorities. Because of this discrepancy between the official measurement and the subsequent measurements, I believe that additional attention should be given to: Real-world residential exposure conditions near wireless infrastructure; Variability of exposure levels over time; Measurement methodologies and their limitations; Long-term exposure assessment in occupied dwellings; Transparency and reproducibility of exposure measurements. For transparency, I am submitting both the independent measurement report and the response received from the ANFR. I respectfully request that the FCC consider situations where different measurement campaigns may produce significantly different results and evaluate whether additional research or monitoring could help improve public understanding of residential RF exposure. The existence of materially different measurement results in the same dwelling illustrates why ongoing scientific review and independent verification remain important for public confidence in RF exposure assessments. Thank you for considering this information.

I am a victim of Cyber Torture or Electronic Harassment for almost 5 years. Please do some research as a lot of people are suffering from this mind control torture program and yet a lot of people are still uninformed that is going on. This is happening to innocent civilian people. A lot of our veterans are being tortured too, one example is Lt. David Voigts. I have been subjected to physical and psychological torture nonstop everyday. I am experiencing sleep deprivation, torture to my body: burning my skin, my eyes, and my head, giving me constant headaches, involuntary movement (toes twitching nonstop that is very uncomfortable, hand jerk etc. I get a lot of flashbacks plus manipulation of feelings, forced blanking my mind when I speak, read and think. and they also do satanic ritual abuse where they project a lot of nasty sadistic sick things in your head, they also can manipulate your breathing, sometimes I have a feeling of being choked. there is so much more than I can only think but "God is our witness." PLEASE HELP us. I read that this weapon that they use to use is satellite or cell tower based. I am tired of being ignored when we ask for help, nobody could seem to help us stop this torture. This can't be going on.. I worried about the FUTURE of our children. :( *I have attached some pictures of my tortured eyes.

Having to deal with this myself, growing up, and having worked with so many individuals with dementia and children with special needs, I am passionate about neuroplasticity and cognitive development. I have numerous articles that I would love to share with you all if you are willing to do so. At one time, I reached out to Dr. Kennedy, but I do not know whether or not he viewed my research. Thank you all for your research on this subject. I will continue to conduct research, myself, and I look forward to seeing your data, as well. Thanks you!

Dear OASH staffs, I’m the Chair of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection and I just received information about US Health Ministry the Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields from few my US colleagues (Dr’s Moskowitz, Pakhomov, Slesin etc). As is well known, the EMF exposure limits for the general public in Russia is more strong than in the USA (in 100 times). The main reasons for this is differing criteria for assessing harm from EMF biological effects, as well as the specific nature of the state regulatory system for electromagnetic field sources in Russia. Russia has 130 years of scientific school in EMF biomes research, therefore we have collected datas about most of EMF bioeffects, including non-thermal, information and thermal effects. As Russia has strict mandatory EMF limits under states service control, we haven’t issues regarding EMF hypersensitivity or EMF cancer. The question of specific EMF limits for children in digital education environment is discuss now (for example, on national hygiene science and radiobiology conference last week). Hope you and colleagues know, that the international debate over the reasons for and advisability of a strict EMF limit has been ongoing for more than 50 years, include direct discussion between US and Russian scientists since early 1970th. Mandatory EMF limits were established in Russia (USSR) in 1968; some last, EMF limits for general population covering all EMF frequencies since 1971. One of the most edition of EMF radio frequency limit took place in 1984, after finish of the USSR-USA joint EMF health research project under government’s agreement (1975-1985). Our EMF health scientist has joint Russia-USA bioEMF projects in 1997-2006 too. US Scientists from few universities participated in these projects, as EPA staffs and EMF researchers from AFRL (Radio Frequency Radiation Branch, Brooks Air Force Base), who was as IEEE C95 members. Huge collection of EMF biological effects data has been summarized and analyzed; these are likely the best syntheses available, enabling the establishment of «dose-effect» relationships and the prediction of both medical and biological effects for new exposure conditions. Although biological effects can vary, when we talk about medical consequences, it's clear that adults human has a limited number of possible ways to react, adapt, and de-adapt to electromagnetic overexposure. Therefore, it is not the best methodology way to find for distinct effects based on the specific EMF source (such as 5/6G). However, there are specific aspects to the EMF impact on a child's organism, including effects on the formation and development of children’s nervous system, that necessitate a special approach to electromagnetic safety for children. The WHO Electromagnetic Project, launched in 1996, was unsuccessful; it failed to resolve the issue of EMF health standard int harmonization and has some accusations of industry influence. Despite the turbulence, global economic and technologies continue to evolve, therefore need to have a common approach for electromagnetic safety for humans. So, the EMF initiative of the Minister Mr. Kennedy could be international. We know that China’s exposure limits fall somewhere between those of Russia and the USA; however, the country’s system for monitoring electromagnetic safety regarding environmental sources has utilized Russian methods as base for adopting. As a chairperson, I possess all the original materials regarding research into the biological effects of electromagnetism in the USSR and Russia. Of course, the majority of these publications are in Russian, which presents a challenge for analysis in English. I’m attaching our article in English, which summarizes main conclusion of EMF bio-medical research in Russia. We would appreciate your opinion on possible international participation in the electromagnetic safety system. Several years ago, I received a mail from Mr. Kennedy, when he was not yet the USA Secretary for Health. We would be happy to restart scientific cooperation for public health once again in EMF health safety issues. This letter doesn’t represent the position of the government, was not initiated by the government, and is not intended to influence the policies of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Sincerely, Dr. Oleg A. Grigoriev Dr. Sc. (radiobiology), Ph.D.(radiobiology & hygiene of non-ionizing radiation) Chairman, Russian National Committee for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection Member of the Board, Scientific Council for Radiobiology, Russian Academy of Sciences

I am sensitive to electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) and radio frequencies (RFs) caused by cell phones, electricity, WiFi, cell towers, and other wireless and electronic devices. To say that the discovery of my sensitivity greatly impacted my life, is an understatement. It nearly RUINED me, I had thoughts of ending my life. It has certainly ruined my career as a public school teacher. I can no longer teach in person because I cannot tolerate being around antennas, cell phones, smart meters, and all of the other miscellaneous wireless devices. I am forced to work from home and do not make nearly the amount of money that I used to make. I began having health issues in 2016. My symptoms included leg numbness, brain fog, balance issues, gastrointestinal issues, heart issues, and list goes on. I had never had any health issues prior, at that time I was in my mid 40s. That year, in 2016 was the first year they put WiFi on the ceiling of my classroom. Additionally, I was in a classroom with several iPads and cell phones. Through my health insurance, I had several tests done. The doctors told me it might be MS or a brain tumor. Over a 4 year period, I had blood tests, MRIs, nerve tests, endoscopy, colonoscopy, ekg, and several visits to address the many symptoms that I was experiencing. In the spring of 2020, 5g towers were being deployed all over my city and around my neighborhood. I started developing ear infections, heart issues, and my body felt like it was vibrating all the time. I knew that I hit the end of the road with Western Medicine, all the tests were inconclusive and there was nothing they could do for me. So, I decided to take matters into my own hands. I got rid of my WIFI and cell phone, I fully wired my home and began sleeping with the electricity off in my bedroom at night. I was still living in a housing tract and was surrounded by cell towers, so my symptoms did not completely go away, but they were greatly reduced by the changes I made. Today, I live with a lot of land separating me from my neighbors. I have a shield on my smart meter, as my electric company will not entertain an analog meter and I am 3 miles from the nearest cell tower. I do not allow cell phones or other wireless devices in my home. I now live a relatively comfortable life with minimal symptoms as long as I stay home. When going out to run errands or traveling I often experience the following: headaches, watery eyes with head pressure, trouble focusing, brain fog, inability to think clearly, balance issues and many other health symptoms depending on the type of EMF or RF and the concentration. I cannot be comfortable out in public, my trips are usually very short. There is plenty of research out there that shows the dangers of wireless radiation. In 1971, the Naval Medical Research Institute in Maryland researched the biological effects and clinical manifestations attributed to radio frequency and microwave radiation. I highlighted the symptoms that I have personally experienced as a result of wireless radiation. In the Naval Medical Research Institute report, they found that the radiation caused all of the following and more: heating of organs, corneal damage, altered menstruation, altered fetal development, liver enlargement, decreased lactation in nursing mothers, altered renal function, changes in the oxidative processes in skin and organs, altered blood flow rate, electrocardiographic changes, myocardial necrosis, dehydration, death, headaches, insomnia, cranial nerve disorders, seizures, convulsions, altered heart rhythm, structural alterations in synapses of vagus nerve, stimulation of parasympathetic nervous system and inhibition of sympathetic nervous system, depression, impotence, anxiety, lack of concentration, tremors, dizziness, scalp sensations, chest pain, increased irritability, blood disorders, vascular disorders, biochemical changes, metabolic disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, endocrine gland changes, and genetic and chromosomal changes. (Navy-Microwave-and-RF-Effects-Brief-1971.pdf)