Exposure limits & oversight

First, thank you for opening doors to this discussion. In 2014, Rudolf Steiner Books published my book, An Electronic Silent Spring. It cited 200+ peer-reviewed studies about the biological effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) emitted by wireless devices and telecom infrastructure. First person accounts related to these studies. It reported the 1996 Telecom Act’s Section 704; the FCC’s definition of “harmful interference” (interference with existing broadcasts—NOT biology; FCC’s 2013 reclassifying the outer ear as an extremity so that mobile devices near it are allowed a Specific Absorption Rate of 4.0 W/kg, higher than the 1.6 W/kg allowed for non-extremities such as the head. Solutions included Whitney North Seymour’s amendment to Section 704. Dr. Gary Olhoeft advised me. He taught electrical engineering and geophysics at Colorado School of Mines for decades. In 2009, he got a deep brain stimulator (DBS) to ease his Parkinson’s symptoms—and experienced significant interference between his DBS and EMR-emitting devices. About 10% of Americans have a medical implant. Fewer than 0.5% of these devices have been tested in rigorous clinical trials. “Implantable Material and Device Regulation” Sept. 2021, Vol. 23, No. 9; E667-756, AMA Journal of Ethics. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/sites/joedb/files/2021-08/joe-2109_2.pdf How do EMR emissions from mobile phones, laptops, iPods, cellular antennas, smart utility meters, Wi-Fi, e-vehicles and transformers affect medical implants (deep brain stimulators, cardiac pacemakers, orthopedic devices, cochlear implants, continuous glucose monitors, insulin pumps) and people with implants? Here are a few related studies: Implanted medical devices in workers exposed to radio-frequency radiation (B. Hocking, 1991). How exposure to EMR may increase heat load and/or produce signal interference to orthopedic devices, cardiac pacemakers and cochlear implants. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2047801/ A review of radiofrequency-induced heating challenge caused to medical implants during MRI procedures. AS Afolabi, 2025. J. of Eelctrical Systems and Information Technology. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s43067-025-00264-3 Neurostimulators and Radiation Therapy: Is there any risk? H. Rida, 2025. Discusses safety guidelines in patients undergoing radiation therapy. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1879850024002790 American Heart Association’s post about devices that may interfere with defibrilators and pacemakers. https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/arrhythmia/prevention--treatment-of-arrhythmia/devices-that-may-interfere-with-icds-and-pacemakers Electromagnetic interference can lead a pacemaker to misread the heart’s beats. Prolonged or intense EMI can damage the pacemaker’s circuitry. https://forhearts.org/pacemakers-and-electromagnetic-interference-what-you-need-to-know/ I attach my book, its chapter 6 and testimony from Dr. Olhoeft and a woman with Type 1 diabetes. In creating discussion about the effects of EMR exposure, what are your goals? While everyone lives with laws that make environment (and health) considerations illegal, landlines are being eliminated, and more cell towers, smart meters, chromebooks and e-vehicles are deployed we need education about living with EMR exposure. We need to learn and respect nature’s cycles and to care for ourselves in EMR-saturated environments. We need forums that welcome questions; statutes that respect biological impacts; and opt-outs.

I strongly agree that the HHS should set up a task force to investigate & update the regulations and safety standards of EMF exposure that has not been updated since 1986. This needs to be done for the health of us all now and future generations. Its long overdue.

I am a 64-year-old man whose family owns a vacation home in Hillman Township, Michigan. A cell tower developer is seeking to construct a massive telecommunications tower just feet from my property. Like others who live nearby, we purchased and maintained this home to enjoy peace, privacy, and the natural environment -- not to face the prospect of significant, long-term exposure to high levels of wireless radiation emissions. This is not a matter of NIMBY-ism. This is a matter of public health and the responsible, thoughtful sitting of powerful industrial equipment. I urge HHS to prioritize research into the biological mechanisms of harm. Federal research should investigate the effects of RF radiation on cellular signaling, oxidative stress, DNA damage and repair, neurological function, and reproductive and developmental health. HHS should fund independent, replicated laboratory studies, long-term animal research, and prospective human studies examining chronic and cumulative exposure, including levels below current federal limits. Research should also examine particularly vulnerable populations, including children, pregnant women, and older adults. According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer's 2013 Monograph Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation, children absorb up to ten times more wireless radiation in the bone marrow of the skull compared to adults due to their thinner skulls, smaller heads, and higher brain conductivity. I urge HHS to recommend that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) reassesses and lowers its existing RF exposure limits. Current RF exposure limits are so permissive that they’re essentially the equivalent of a 500-mph speed limit. No wonder people are getting sick! The FCC must reconsider the Specific Anthropomorphic Mannequin (SAM) model used to assess cell phone RF exposure. SAM is based on a simplified model of a standardized adult head and was developed to assess localized RF energy absorption under specified testing conditions. It does not adequately represent the full range of human anatomy, including children, differences in head and body size, or the complexity of real-world phone use and exposure. A compliance test based on a standardized model cannot, by itself, establish that all users are adequately protected under all realistic conditions. HHS should encourage independent evaluation of SAM's limitations and support improved testing methods that better reflect diverse users, realistic usage patterns, and modern wireless devices. I am not opposed to telecommunications technology. I am asking that public health receive the same serious consideration as infrastructure expansion. I respectfully urge HHS to lead a coordinated federal research effort, further investigate the biological mechanisms of RF-related harms, recommend stronger FCC exposure limits, and support more scientifically representative cell phone testing methods. Americans deserve nothing less. Thank you for your consideration of my comment. Respectfully submitted, Chris Caswell

1. & 2. I am responding as: an individual 3a. Type of wireless or RF/EMF sources involved (e.g., mobile phones, Wi-Fi, smart meters…)Smart Meter 3b. Nature, duration, frequency, and approximate timing (e.g., years):I have two friends Bob in Chehalis, WA and Alice "Anuttama" in Glenoma, WA - with Smart Meters in Lewis County, Washington State. Both had the Itron Centron AMR CL-200 Smart Meter, placed on their homes around 2022 by Lewis County Public Utility District (PUD) against their will (mandate or shut off electricity). Alice "Anuttama" Budd filed a lawsuit against Lewis County PUD in 2024 in Lewis County Superior Court. The case got dismissed. But the case filings exist. 3c. Adverse health effect(s) experienced:Alice "Anuttama" Budd had a roommate who developed pancreatic cancer and died. Alice "Anuttama" Budd developed breast cancer and died December 2025. Bob in Chehalis - his wife developed cancer below the belt in late 2025. His wife had to have her intestines REMOVED and she wears a bag. 3d. Time from first exposure to first appearance of adverse health effects; and did a change in exposure coincide with the onset of adverse effects:Alice "Anuttama" Budd of Glenoma, WA had breast cancer when I first met her in 2024. The Itron Centron Smart Meter was installed in 2022. Bob in Chehalis, WA - his wife was diagnosed with cancer below the belt in late November 2025. The Smart Meter was installed on Bob's house in 2022. 3e. Was medical evaluation or treatment sought? (Optionally:) Was there a diagnosis?I am giving you second-hand information based on conversations with Alice "Anuttama" Budd who is now dead. Anuttama told me in 2024 that she had breast cancer, that she didn't trust doctors, and she did not seek treatment after diagnosis. Bob in Chehalis, WA, his wife did seek medical treatment. He called it "cancer below the belt." He told me that his wife underwent several surgeries, including surgery to remove her intestines. Now, she wears a bag. 3f. Were steps taken to reduce or eliminate exposure, and were there subsequent changes in the effects?Alice "Anuttama" Budd fought long and hard in Superior Court to have the Smart Meter removed to no avail. She sent me a video of an EMF monitor measuring the radiation coming off the meter. I have the video, which I can provide by email. Alice "Anuttama" Budd and Bob in Chehalis, WA both begged Lewis County PUD to REMOVE the smart meters and Lewis County PUD REFUSED. 3g. Any supporting documentation? This includes Scientific Reports, exposure measurements, or other relevant information:I have the EMF measurement video along with some court documents from Alice "Anuttama" Budd that I can send by email. Additional Details you would like to share about your experiences of adverse health effects you believe to be associated with exposure to wireless radiation or EMF's:I personally do NOT have a smart meter because I fought back against Lewis County PUD Smart Meter mandate for two years (2023-2025) and won (for the time being). My entire neighborhood has Smart Meters with the radio turned ON since March 2024 in Lewis County, Washington State. So, I am surrounded by Smart Meters. What I noticed since March 2024. Nearly all of the bugs disappeared on my rural property on acreage for about two years. That's not a joke. In the spring of 2026, the bugs slowly started to reaapear. This is the first year (2026) that Im seeing caterpillars, butterflies, black flies, black ants, et al. B1a. Sources you experience as causing you Adverse Effects: B1b. Sources you can sense, but don't seem to harm you: B1c. Sources you can use without sensing or being harmed: B1d. Sources that seem to provide benefit (i.e., electrotherapy): B2a. Health conditions you think may contribute to your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless: B2b. Health conditions you don't necessarily associate with your sensitivity to EMFs including wireless, but might be relevant: B3. For each subquestion please list up to 5 drugs or therapies or home remedies (if any) B3a. That you recommend, as they helped you tolerate or recover from EMF exposure: B3b. That you recommend, but you’re not positive that they help: B3c. That helped you but you don’t recommend. (e.g., the benefit did not last long or the side effects were too harmful): B3d. Treatments that had no effect: B3e. Treatments that made your sensitivity worse:45-54, 55-64 B4. What is your age range?45-54, 55-64 B5. What year did you become aware of your sensitivity to wireless radiation or electromagnetic fields? B6. What country, state, province, or major city were you living in when you first noticed your sensitivity to wireless or electromagnetic fields?Glenoma, Washington and Chehalis, Washington, both in rural Lewis County, Washington State.

To whom it may concern, I feel the need to be direct when I state that the fact that in 2026, we’re just now “seeking public input” on a subject that has been, beyond all shadow of a doubt, scientifically proven for many decades, feels like an afront to anyone who can see the broader economic picture, and the (all-too-typical) deprioritization of public health in favor of corporate greed. Let’s face it, The Invisible Rainbow, first published in 2017, covering countless, well-documented scientific studies going back more than 100 years, makes it abundantly clear that WE HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS OF ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION ON BIOLOGY FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. That said, as for my personal experience, my life has been fundamentally and irreparably altered as a consequence of EMF exposure. I’ve been hospitalized several times, and am now permanently unable to participate in many of the activities most people take for granted. I have to cover myself from head to ankle with expensive and uncomfortable faraday clothing when I leave my home. Even with this protection, I cannot stand to be in high-EMF environments (which is pretty much everywhere now) for longer than several hours at a time, and the effects on my health are catastrophic. My activities have been limited, my diet has been limited, my social and professional life have been decimated, and my life will never be the same. But at least I haven’t died of a brain tumor, as quite a few of my clients, colleagues, friends, and family members have. Again, the fact that we’re “seeking public input” on this topic is a bitter bill to swallow. It feels a bit like asking people what their experience has been drinking arsenic-infused soda that we’ve been insisting is safe for the last 50 years, as if the people making money (huge, HUGE amounts of money) haven’t known the answer from the beginning. Anyway, I digress. On the upside, I now run a business that stays consistently busy helping clients who are becoming sick en masse due to the electromagnetic radiation soup we’re all now swimming in. Tragic. The recent acquisition of the 800mhz band by Starlink is a nightmare waiting to happen. I’ve published a book, created online content, read the studies (no – not all of them, let’s face it – there are many thousands), read the books, watched the documentaries, deep-dived into the science, the biological mechanisms, and worked with countless clients suffering the effects of EMR. We don’t need more science. It’s been done. The effects are clear. The BioInitiative Report alone made this point, as have innumerable other sources. What we need are protections and education for an unaware populace suffering while corporations yield record profits at the expense of their customers’ health and, yes, their very lives. I can only hope that enough individuals in the decision-making process have enough integrity to stand up for what is right, rather than being cowed (or bought) by the financial interests committed to keeping this subject marginalized and quiet. I must say, based on history, I’m not optimistic. But perhaps I’ll be pleasantly surprised. I hope you choose to do what is right. You do have the power to make a difference. I thank you for your consideration. - Anonymous EMR-S sufferer P.S. – I’m choosing not to attach files below because I fail to see the point. Yes, I have countless studies, infographics, PDFs, etc. stored on my computer that I could include, but as I mentioned – we all already KNOW the truth. The Environmental Health Trust, The BioInitiative, and literally COUNTLESS resources online have enough data to drown in. And it all says the same thing – as the BioInitiative Report put it “Bioeffects are clearly established”. Full stop.

*Folkets Strålevern* (The Citizens´ Radiation Protection Norway) was established in recognition of the existence of documented, peer-reviewed, and published international research concerning the adverse health effects of electromagnetic radiation (such as that currently used for wireless communication—mobile telephony, wireless networks, etc.). It is a significant problem for the Norwegian public that this knowledge is still not reflected in Norwegian laws and regulations. The population needs a reliable, attentive organization tasked with providing protection and information regarding this critical issue. Currently, the authorities do not provide the Norwegian public with updated and accurate information on this subject. *Folkets Strålevern* works to enable the population to more easily make informed, rational decisions regarding the appropriate use of wireless technology. The overarching objective of *Folkets Strålevern* is to help protect people and the environment from the harmful effects of non-ionizing radiation. The current state of knowledge in this field indicates that existing exposure limits and regulations are based on outdated principles regarding the effects and mechanisms of action of non-ionizing radiation. Consequently, these standards are inadequate for protecting humans, animals, and other forms of biological life against the potentially very serious long-term harmful effects of such radiation—effects that have been documented even at levels far below current exposure limits. Folkets Strålevern (The People’s Radiation Protection) advocates for: – the implementation of a genuine precautionary approach, capable of protecting both humans and all biological life in nature from the harmful effects of non-ionizing radiation; – the establishment of exposure limits and legislation that account for the actual biological effects of radiation—on humans, animals, insects, and plant life—at non-thermal levels, as demonstrated in several internationally published, peer-reviewed studies; – the introduction of exposure limits for non-ionizing radiation that, unlike current standards, provide protection against the harmful effects of long-term exposure. Folkets Strålevern is not an activist organization; its purpose does not include providing practical, case-specific advice or conducting measurements of electromagnetic fields. For a reasonable fee—plus the coverage of travel expenses—we can deliver professional presentations on the subject to groups, neighborhood associations, schools, kindergartens, and other organizations. Furthermore, Folkets Strålevern is neither a patient organization nor a support group for individuals who have been harmed by electromagnetic radiation, or for those seeking to determine whether such harm has occurred. The Association for the Electrosensitive (FELO) was established for this specific purpose. Folkets Strålevern is funded through membership fees and donations that are not contingent upon any reciprocal service or benefit. Membership is open to anyone who wishes to join. See folkets-stralevern.org

Independent research (not funded by telecommunications companies) has shown a clear link between RF radiation and serious health issues in children, adults and flora/fauna. The HHS should follow the guidelines of BioInitiative Report 2012 unless clear scientific evidence shows that a different level of rf exposure is safe. Below are the links to research documenting the need for stronger limits on rf exposure: Exposure limits to radiofrequency EMF do not account for cancer risk or reproductive toxicity assessed from data in experimental animals | Environmental Health | Springer Nature Link Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G | Environmental Health | Springer Nature Link Cellular and molecular effects of non-ionizing electromag... The roles of intensity, exposure duration, and modulation on the biological effects of radiofrequency radiation and exposure guidelines: Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine: Vol 41 , No 2 - Get Access Genetic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields: Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine: Vol 40 , No 2 - Get Access

Hello - To be brief, I am a medical professional and read Dr Robert O Beckers books about the harms and benefits of RF as well as listening to many investigators on the subject of RF , WIFI and EMF in general such as radiation research.org. I had moved to a 10 acre piece of land in Fl and keep my WIFI off unless needed. Everything is hard wired. In 2025 the SECO corporation, my electric provider, decided to strong arm me into placing a smart meter on my home after many letters and objections, it didn’t matter - they would bring the sheriff if I continued to refuse. If I tried to use my faraday cage again they would fine me $200. I informed them that our new HHS Secretary would be speaking out against wide use of EMF. We are electrical beings and of course there will be health effects. Please, at least educate and give people the opportunity to choose. Thank You

2: I am a chartered electrical engineer in the UK, responding as an individual consumer and patient. (I am not representing my professional institution.) The answers below provide a brief summary of my experience in suffering adverse health reactions to digital electricity meters and my personal investigation into the cause. Further details are available here: https://engx.theiet.org/f/discussions/30160/reasons-why-i-suffered-tinnitus-insomnia-chronic-fatigue-and-other-health-problems-after-having-digital-electricity-meters-installed 3a: I've suffered adverse reactions to EFs and EMFs from: • Digital electricity meters, smart or dumb • Broadband routers • Mains LED lighting 3b, c, d & f: I started suffering severe high-pitched (14 kHz) non-pulsatile tinnitus, ear pressure and insomnia 15 hours after smart meters were installed in my home in February 2022. For the next 5 days, I slept no more than 90 minutes per night. The electricity meter was then replaced with another model. When this meter was powered on, my ears each felt an electrical shock. My tinnitus, ear pressure and insomnia improved slightly, but still not tolerable The smart communications module was removed 2 days later, the power company believing I would no longer suffer. Alas, further symptoms developed over the following days and weeks, chronic fatigue becoming the most debilitating, while struggling to get medical help and an analog meter refitted urgently. In July 2022, the company installed an old non-smart digital meter. My tinnitus intensified almost immediately. Another such meter was trialed 3 weeks later. My tinnitus eased, but I developed a migraine 4 days later. I left home and over the next 3 days I recovered from the migraine and chronic fatigue. I returned home, started to feel unwell almost immediately, so I left and recovered again. I returned home on the day this meter was being replaced. Outside, I tingled horribly and instructed my wife to turn off the electricity. The tingling ceased immediately, providing evidence that the household wiring was acting like a transmission antenna. The replacement meter, the same type as the 2nd, caused symptoms similar to those experienced while its counterpart was installed. An analog meter was finally refitted 2 weeks later. I recovered back to around 80% of normal in 1 week. However, tinnitus and insomnia still continue, but these are milder than at any time during my meter ordeal, but they are getting worse as exposure to what has become known as “dirty electricity” increases. Details of symptoms, their approximate timing in relation to meter installations and my actions to mitigate the effects can be found in Attachment 1. 3e: Medical assessments were sought throughout my ordeal. I was only ever diagnosed with tinnitus and a blood pressure problem. All the medics I saw were sadly at a loss to help me. 3g: Attachment 2 contains a list of the scientific evidence I have obtained in full. 5n: Regulators must be fully independent from organizations that manufacture or use equipment that emits RF/EMF for financial gain. 5o: Yes. The cause of my sensitivity, low frequency EMFs, are poorly represented in the available science, despite being considered bio-active. The public understandably have concerns over high frequency mobile communication signals, but few people realize that badly suppressed switched-mode power supplies and inverters can cause debilitating health issues due to their low frequency emissions. 5p: The current use of SAR ignores the characteristics that cause interference with biology at much lower intensities than required for heating body tissue. (Polarization is another characteristic that needs to be considered.) 6: Scientists claim there are over 125,000 pieces of evidence available. 8: Assessment must take into account all characteristics and also real-world conditions where a dwelling or workplace are subject to multiple emitters of RF/EMF. 9: A system to forewarn people of potentially harmful exposure is essential. Currently, sensitive people only find out if somewhere is harmful when they start feeling ill, which is too late. Avoidance is key not just to stay well, but also to prevent sensitivity increasing. 10: New systems must be developed in order to assess the scale of this problem. The medical profession have to take notice of those of us who know we are sensitive. They also need to find out why a minority of people have become highly sensitive in order to prevent the majority becoming so sensitive. 11: Current standards are largely based upon short term tests with a healthy adult male and a few animals. They are highly unsuited for protecting children, females, the elderly and adults with certain medical conditions. 16: Low frequency EMFs: The cost to suppress these frequencies from power supplies and inverters is peanuts in comparison to the cost of healthcare, welfare payments, lost productivity and ruined lives etc.

I have already had to move 3 times due to radiowave sickness. Once from Riversode, CA in 2020 and again from Somis, CA (southern California which is extremely cell tower). I moved to a rural portion of Northern California, Grass Valley, and again I am being threatened by the proposed cell tower on Dog Bar Rd that is currently being fought in federal court. Under the current rules, the county has no ability to object to cell towers. Guidelines which were set in the 1990s. Remember what the phones looked like in the 90s with the antennas and no internet? Those guidelines are as antiquated as those phones. When I had to return to Southern California for a couple of weeks, I had a rash on my entire upper body from radiofrequency exposure. I also get headaches and chest pain. Also, the microwave radiation penetrates much further into children's skulls that adult's skulls. In other areas of life, we set the exposure limits at a level that will protect pregnant women and children. Why should this be any different? China requires pregnant women to wear radiofrequency shielding belly bands and Russia has limits on how much minors should use cell phones daily. What is that saying when Russia and China care more about protecting their citizens than we do?