Exposure limits & oversight

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 very concerned member of the public, and as a family member. I am 81 years of age, a retired organic farmer, currently leasing a WSDA licensed food processing facility where I make and sell an entire brand line of local, organic, ready-to-eat nutrient-dense foods to make America healthy again. It has been 30 years since I purchased ultra-processed foods for myself, also having dedicated the past 30 years to preserving farmland and protecting our food supply. My licensed, leased kitchen is on a 200-acre sheep farm in rural Yelm, Washington. After a lengthy community effort opposing the cell tower, Thurston, County issued a permit for a 4-G Cell Tower to be placed on this farm and in view of my kitchen (>>>>>>>>>). When faced with the prospect of the 4-G Cell Tower going live I gave serious consideration to moving my commercial kitchen but decided to stay when I realized finding a cell-tower-free location was becoming increasingly difficult to find. Now with the FCC on a fast track to install as many cell towers as possible, those fears and concerns have come true. Now I am experiencing health issues from proximity to this cell tower: frequent atypical headaches, heart arrythmia and depression. I have sought medical attention, but no definitive action has been taken. To make matters worse, there are 3 or 4 more cell towers approved or in process of being approved in our rural neighborhood which will also amplify the cell tower on my kitchen property. To make matters even worse, the cell tower recently approved on Penn Rd. is 1 mile from my daughter and her husband’s organic farm, plus 2 or 3 more potential cell tower sites in our rural neighborhood. The FCC is endeavoring to fast track multiple cell towers in our rural neighborhood we chose to live in to get away from cell towers. The prospect of her and her husband being exposed 24/7 to EMF Radiation is deeply concerning, actually really concerning that my entire community will be bombarded 24/7 with RF/EMF. I do not own or use a cell phone even while endeavoring to run a business. I have a landline for my phone, and I am hard-wired with ethernet to connect to my PC. Sounds good, except I have a Cell Tower in my back yard, and as mentioned, with symptoms of radiation exposure/sickness. As stated before, the tables need to be turned: the FCC needs to be required to prove RF/EMF are safe, NOT the other way around. As also stated before, it is beyond wrong the FCC will not allow health claims to even be considered as a factor in the decision-making process. First, I don’t know how you back-track cell towers, but they should have NEVER been approved until proven safe just like prescription medications. This is my first point. The FCC should be required to prove that EMF Radiation from cell towers is safe and at what levels, not the other way around. There was something categorically wrong with whatever agency thought this was okay, and with the public, me included, who allowed them to get away with this. Absurd and patently wrong. It’s beyond absurd that somehow citing health issue concerns became not acceptable to oppose cell towers. Doubly absurd an agency that has no expertise in public health, the FCC is in a position to make public health decisions. I am thrilled Health and Human Services has issued this RFI. My first request is for you to place public health decisions back in the hands of a public health agency, HHS.

Thank you, HHS Leadership, for the opportunity to share my personal perspective regarding Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I believe that I experience significant adverse effects from these technologies. My symptoms include headaches, skin and body pain as shooting, tingling, and burning sensations, and low level general anxiety that feels unnatural to me. Identifying the specific source is sometimes difficult, as exposure may come from the smartphone, smartwatch, laptop, tablet, Wi-Fi router, smart meter, cell tower, or other wireless infrastructure. At times it is obvious, like when I send an email from the phone and a burning sensation occurs in the hand holding the phone after I hit "send". These experiences are difficult to discuss with medical professionals, friends, and family because the prevailing assumption is that wireless technologies are harmless. I ask HHS to take seriously the distress people report, even when the causes remain uncertain. My home's smart meter, located outside the kitchen, is a great concern. While in that area I sometimes experience what feels like painful pulses or beams emanating from its vicinity. I also observe distressing patterns of emotional tension occurring in this location, more than normal for a family kitchen. I recognize that these observations do not establish causation, but I believe they warrant objective investigation rather than dismissal. I am undergoing medically supervised chelation for heavy metals in an attempt to find relief, at considerable expense and without a clear solution. The financial burden is unsustainable. I need accessible, evidence-based medical guidance that investigates potential causes rather than a mystery. During recent travel, I used an eSIM that restricted my phone to 4G connectivity. I experienced no anxiety for two weeks, until I returned to the mesh networks of the United States. This observation does not prove that 5G or any particular frequency caused my symptoms, but it raises a question I believe deserves investigation: Could different wireless technologies, exposure patterns, or environmental conditions affect some individuals differently? I believe we must reconsider the widespread implementation of technology which results in Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I think it might be a greater threat to our world than previously understood. I worry for my global neighbors and all our children as many cannot feel the disturbing emanations from their tech devices. I realize we are very far down this Tech road and pivoting away is, sadly yet probably, impossible. However, Consumers should have meaningful options to select lower-exposure technologies, including access to 4G-only connectivity when technically possible. Public installations across cities should be shielded to protect the citizens and nature. Scientific research warrants continued investigation. The U.S. National Toxicology Program reported evidence of certain tumors in animals exposed to high levels of RF radiation: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/research/topics/cellphones. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classified RF electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans: https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com. Research into environmental impacts identifies substantial evidence gaps concerning wildlife and plants, including reproduction, development, behavior, and growth: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13750-023-00304-3#citeas. Please review the information and concerns compiled by the Cellular Phone Task Force: https://cellularphonetaskforce.org/. These findings do not prove that wireless exposures cause the symptoms I experience, but they underscore the need for rigorous, independent research. I respectfully request that HHS engage several areas of actions immediately: 1. Support independent research into EMF/RF exposure and reported health effects, including symptoms in people who report sensitivity. 2. Investigate possible environmental effects on wildlife, pollinators, plants, biodiversity, and ecosystems. 3. Review existing exposure standards in light of emerging evidence, long-term exposure, vulnerable populations, and new technologies. 4. Promote transparent exposure information, accessible medical evaluation, and practical exposure-reduction options for concerned individuals. 5. Ensure that research is methodologically rigorous, publicly accessible, and free from inappropriate commercial influence. I also ask that my experience and that of others be investigated fairly, that scientific uncertainties be addressed openly, and that the public have meaningful choices while research continues. Thank you for your attention to and care for public health, scientific integrity, and the protection of all life.

I am a former instrumentation and electrical technician (2004–2021, oil & gas and pharmaceutical). The attached comment responds to Questions 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 13, 16, 17 and 18. It documents an unregulated residential exposure within the RFI’s scope: high-frequency noise voltage conducted on household wiring in the 2–150 kHz band, from switch-mode power supplies and electronic utility meters. Federal conducted-emission limits (47 CFR 15.107) begin at 150 kHz, and ANSI C12.1-2022 exempts the most common residential meter form from harmonic testing. I include laboratory and personal field measurements, a balanced summary of the health evidence, my own documented case, and six specific recommendations. I ask HHS to define this exposure, fund a validated measurement method with NIST and NIOSH, and coordinate with the FCC to close the 2–150 kHz gap.

I am responding as an individual consumer and parent. In December of 2006, I was using a flip phone and always held it to my right ear. I experienced hearing loss in my right ear, along with tinnitus. The attached jpeg, 1.21.2007_Tinnitus-Decreased HearingRightEar.jpg, shows the doctors' and radiologist's report. I also experienced vertigo in February 2007. The attached jpeg labeled 7.27.2007_Surgeon'sPathologyReport.jpg, shows the final diagnosis (a Mastoid Bone Tumor) and surgery was required. The surgeon said it was from radiation and sent me information about Radiation Induced Hearing Loss. Please see the attached file labeled 7.27.2007_Radiation Induced-Hearing Loss.jpg for that information. I still suffer from the worsening tinnitus as well as even more hearing loss in my right ear. I have EPPV (a form of vertigo) mostly on my right side. My house has a 'Smart' meter for electricity from ComEd. In my opinion, enough with the 4, 5, and 6G! It is destroying our health. The phones should be tested properly since the technology has gone far beyond the last testing for consumer usage. I'm so thrilled that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is asking for this information! (My life is NOT better from the radiation exposure I experienced.) Thank you for your attention to this matter. Debra Kocis

I am father to two daughters that exhibit high sensitivity and adverse reactions to emf exposure, specifically cell phone, cell tower, and wifi router radiation. I am grateful that the HHS has invited public comment on this issue. As a high school physics teacher for over 30 years, I was at first slow to believe that wireless radiation could cause non-thermal biological effects in humans. The alarming symptoms experienced by my daughters, however, challenged my assumptions. I spent over $1000 on various meters so I could take my own measurements. I understand that there has been a lot of scientific research on this subject and that many studies conclude there are no harmful effects from cell phones or cell towers. My own experience and that of my family convinces me that this conclusion is false. Microwave radiation can definitely have serious effects on some people. In order to protect my family from wireless radiation harms we moved out of Chicago and now live in a semi-rural area on 2 acres. We use only wired internet devices in the home. We have no wifi router or bluetooth devices. The average microwave density in our home is now under 1.0 microwatt per square meter as measured by a Safe and Sound Pro II RF meter (see attached image). In contrast, the level in the high school where I teach averages 4.6, and in the eldercare facility where my son works around 18 𝜇W/m2. (See attached images) My eldest daughter began showing symptoms during her junior year at public high school in Chicago. When in the school building, which had a high density of wifi routers installed throughout, she would gradually feel more and more ill with nausea, brain fog, weakness, and bloody noses. These symptoms quickly abated when she left the building. Her high school counselor discounted her complaints and suggested she seek psychotherapy. She tried toughing it out, wanting to finish her high school diploma, but the continued high exposure only made her sensitivity increase. Eventually she had to withdraw and complete her diploma as a homeschooler. Meanwhile, my second daughter also began exhibiting similar symptoms. She was already being homeschooled but very active in Chicago community extra curricular activities – theater groups, art classes, park district programs, and martial arts. Sadly, because of adverse reactions to the radiation exposure in these facilities, she had to withdraw from these activities one by one. Similar to her sister, her reactions to RF include brain fog, fatigue, loss of speech, joint pain, and heart irregularities. While the move out of Chicago and the removal of sources of RF from our home was a necessary and effective remedy for my daughters, their lives are severely limited. High levels of RF, over 100 𝜇W/m2, are now becoming ubiquitous. My daughters must carefully limit time spent in stores, urban centers, medical facilities, even church and peoples homes. In person higher education is not possible for them. Radiation free employment is extremely difficult to find. Surviving emf sensitivity is not only logistically difficult but also expensive. In order to avoid the radiation from a smart meter, which emits intense short pulses of emf energy, I have to pay the electrical company a “manual read fee” of $115.77 each month. (See attached electrical bill) This adds up to nearly $1400 per year, a ridiculously unfair penalty. Another source of emf radiation which my daughters react to are LED lightbulbs. These devices produce what is known as “dirty electricity” in the home circuits. It is becoming increasingly difficult and expensive to purchase incandescent lightbulbs. The current federal rules prohibiting the manufacture and sale of incandescent bulbs needs to be repealed. I am very concerned for the future. If the spread of high radiation levels continues at the current pace, opportunities for a healthy life for people like my daughters will shrink ever smaller. I urge the HHS to take seriously the potential harms of RF radiation and pursue more independent research on this important issue.

Table of Contents of Enclosed Document "FCC / HHS Public Comment Anonymous" ======================================================== 1. My Perspective About some of my EMF sources, types, and durations of exposure My health experience Dental imaging and related health problems Evaluation and treatment sought Healthcare professionals’ clinical observations ======================================================== 2. Exposure Standards and Risk Assessment What technical changes would improve assessment, disclosure and mitigation? Measuring EMF exposure in the environment is not the same as measuring how living tissue responds to it over time. About spectrum analysis and proposed safety standards ======================================================== 3. Current and Proposed Research What are the highest-priority research gaps regarding EMF and RF exposure? Study imperative: RF, blood proteins, and blood–brain barrier findings ======================================================== 4. An Evaluation of a Personal Medical Experience Five Common Precursors to EMF Sensitivity 1. Physical Trauma to the Central Nervous System (CNS) 2. Exposure to Chemical Toxins 3. Exposure to Biological Toxins 4. Acute or Chronic Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields 5. An Impaired Immune System Six Actions to Promote Recovery 1. Reduce Exposure to Irritants 2. Rebalance Limbic System 3. Immune Support 4. Detoxification 5. DNA Testing 6. Dental Aspects Flawed Safety Guidelines and the WHO Report (Let's not have a repeat performance please.) ======================================================== CONCLUDING REMARKS FROM ENCLOSED PATIENT EXPERIENCE AND SUGGESTED RESEARCH As I said earlier, scientists characterizing the frequency as they do makes the issue so complicated: operating frequency, power density, specific absorption rate (SAR), electric- and magnetic-field strength, modulation and pulse characteristics, duty cycle, beam-forming, simultaneous exposure to multiple frequencies, duration of exposure, distance from the source, proximity to the body, and cumulative exposure. I’m more interested in biology and the living response, rather than chasing the endless wave. The truth is, distance will always be our friend. And the natural frequency of the Earth is the Schumann resonance near 7.83 Hz. Direct current, at the levels I’m talking about, feels like the closest thing to calm and restoration as we’ll ever get. Each cycle is part of a wave, and a signal can use on/off states—1s and 0s—to represent information. Binary is foundational to computing as we know it. These days, a signal may cycle trillions of times to carry information, and the demand for communication continues to increase. Imagine every individual wave is like softly punching your cat. At first, the cat thinks you are playing and paws back playfully. Then it becomes not so fun, and to make the punching stop, the fangs and teeth come out because it hurts and is causing harm. That’s the stage we are at, and eventually we are going to kill the cat. And is the scientific response might be, “Ah, it doesn’t really matter; we can build a better cat”? Some engineer is probably laughing somewhere, saying, “We already did that!” Good luck, y’all!

I am 70 years old. Cell phones have not always been part of my life, obviously. I have noticed that smart phones and my smart connected car (Subaru Forrester 2019) and other cars with smart features can make me feel tired, dizzy, disoriented. Recently (in the last 6 months) I switched to a phone that is considered "dumb" without all the data features. I cannot get group texts or pictures. My health has improved. I don't get "zapped" anymore. I got rid of the 2019 Subaru with Eye Drive and all the smart features. I have much more energy. My brain works better without all that interference. I also have a Blushield product in my home that counteracts the EMFs. I definitely would like to know more about how to choose low EMF products because I want to be healthy and I want my family to be healthy. It was not easy to find the best phone and car for myself.

I am submitting this comment to share concerns about potential EMF, RF, and wireless radiation exposure in Clinton, Maryland. Since approximately 2020, I have experienced persistent ringing in my ears, headaches, sinus-like symptoms, and unusual floor vibrations from unauthorized digging beneath my property that were not present previously. I have also documented what appear to be blue light rays and other unusual light phenomena directed toward my property and person, including video recordings captured at night. In addition, I have observed elevated EMF readings around certain nearby vehicles that remain stationary for extended periods. These observations have raised concerns about possible exposure from Wi-Fi systems, radio frequency transmissions, wireless infrastructure, and other electromagnetic sources. While I recognize that more research is needed, my experiences lead me to believe that potential health effects from long-term EMF and RF exposure deserve further scientific investigation. I encourage federal agencies to support independent research, review existing exposure standards, increase transparency regarding electromagnetic emissions in residential areas, and take public concerns seriously. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this input. Concerned American Clinton, Maryland

First, I want to thank HHS for soliciting information from the public about EMF and wireless radiation-related health and environmental issues. The federal government has failed to adequately protect the public from ever-increasing exposures to EMFs for decades, and the FCC has abdicated its duty to enact truly protective RF exposure limits. The fact that HHS is taking steps to prioritize research into the biological effects of wireless radiation, and EMFs more broadly, is a meaningful step toward addressing long overdue gaps between science and public health policy in this area. Despite thousands of peer-reviewed, published scientific studies indicating biological harm from wireless radiation exposure, even at levels below FCC exposure limits, today’s wireless environment is governed by 30-year-old exposure limits that only address short-term, thermal impacts of exposure. Meanwhile, children are literally sleeping with cell phones under their pillows at night, men are carrying cell phones in their pants pocket all day long, and massive, industrial cell towers with dozens of wireless antennas on them are installed and operational mere feet away from peoples’ homes. And have you seen the wireless antenna arrays installed atop apartment buildings in New York City? Huge antennas mere feet away from peoples’ bedroom windows! That’s insanity! (I have attached some photos of particularly egregious installations to this comment for the agency’s review.) On a more personal note, sadly, two weeks ago, my Planning Commission (the Jefferson County Planning Commission in Jefferson County, FL), approved a 195-foot-tall cell tower adjacent to my beautiful property that has been in the family for decades. The property is also located in a majority minority community near historic Baptist and Methodist rural churches. Meanwhile, a 302-foot-tall cell tower is already installed and operational just 0.82 miles from the installation site! To assert its bogus “needs” case, Verizon provided the Jefferson County Planning Commission with anonymously produced RF coverage maps. Nowhere in Verizon’s submission is there reference to the type of RF propagation model used to generate its maps or the input parameters used to generate its maps. So, we have no idea how the maps were made. Further, the maps were never verified using real-world data like drive test data or dropped-call records, so we have no idea how accurate the maps are. In essence, what Verizon provided to the County was totally useless, scientifically non-probative pieces of paper. To add insult to injury, the FCC National Broadband Map demonstrates that Verizon already provides 100% outdoor and in-vehicle coverage at and around the installation site. We know that the FCC National Broadband Map is accurate because wireless carriers are required to submit their coverage data twice a year to the FCC under penalty of perjury. In other words, Verizon is legally required to tell the federal government the truth about where its network provides coverage. If carriers lie about their coverage to the FCC, the carrier may be subjected to significant penalties, including monetary penalties and potential enforcement action affecting its FCC authorizations. Again, the map shows that Verizon has 100% coverage. And resident experiences confirm this reality. As for the Planning Commission’s decision to approve the tower, those commissioners ignored every meaningful comment submitted by the public and even an independent, expert RF engineering report explaining why the tower was totally unnecessary given the 302-foot-tall tower that is already up and running less than a mile away. As is the case in most municipalities across America, these commissioners just had no idea what they were doing and received bad advice from municipal legal counsel. Checking boxes is not good governance. Asking real questions and standing up for residents’ interests is. After single-handedly caring for my sick parents for over a decade, my dream was to build a house on this beautiful property in retirement and finally rest. Now, because of a speculative cell tower site developer called Southern Towers and Verizon’s fixed wireless business plans, that dream is utterly shattered. I will not live my final years staring at totally unnecessary industrial monstrosity while bathing in high levels of wireless radiation. Thank you for your consideration of my remarks, and please take swift action to hold the big telecom industry accountable.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit information regarding biological effects and potential health hazards of low-level, long-term exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR). I am uploading here several recent, well-written RFR-related scientific documents. Each one is relevant to the ongoing campaign by many doctors and scientists worldwide to restrict mobile phone base stations (cell towers) to locations at least 300 meters away from residential homes. Currently, in most countries, telecommunications providers are allowed to site base stations almost wherever they want. Yet much scientific evidence now supports the idea that a relatively low-height "small cell" base station (such as those on lamp posts) should be no closer than 300 meters to a residence. The same body of evidence suggests that a large "macro cell" facility typically should be half a mile or more from any home. Upload #1: Akkam 2020 MWR blood ROS.pdf Upload #2: Cell carrier frequencies.pdf Upload #3: Hardell 2022 EHS nr base stns.pdf Upload #4: McCredden 2026 EMF sensitivity survey.pdf Upload #5: Nilsson 2023 5G cases two men.pdf Upload #6: Nilsson 2023 MPBS 5G caused EMR-S.pdf Upload #7: Nilsson 2025 RFR memory probs children.pdf