Exposure limits & oversight

PLEASE PUT A STOP TO THE EMF, RF AND WIRELESS RADIATION. YOU HAVE BEEN BLESSED TO BE IN THE POSITION/TITLE YOUR IN AND WE THE PEOPLE ARE DEPENDING ON YOU TO HELP PROTECT US FROM ALL THIS RADIATION HARM. IT IS SLOWLY KILLING EVERYONE AND NEEDS TO BE SHUT OFF. WE DONT NEED IT. THE OLD WAY OF DOING THING WERE MORE DEPENDABLE AND SAFER WHEN WE DID NOT HAVE THIS WIFI AND EMF POISON. THIS EMF, WIFI IS WARPING PEOPLE'S MINDS AND DISTORYING EVERYONE'S INCLUDING YOUR BODY. YOU BEEN PUT IN A POSITION TO PROTECT AND SERVER THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND WE NEED YOU TO FOR FILL YOUR DUTIES. OUR AND OUR CHILDREN'S HEALTH AND LIVES ARE DEPENDING ON YOU. SHOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT YOU CARE AND SHOW THE BIG TECH AND BIG COMPANIES THAT YOU ARE IN CONTROL AND WILL NOT TOLERATE ANYMORE OF THIS POISION RADIATION THAT IS KILLING AND MAKING PEOPLE SICK. IF YOU DONT THAN ALL OUR BLOOD IS ON YOUR HANDS, PLEASE MAKE A DIFFERANCE AND HELP PROTECT MAN KIND. WE NEED YOUR HELP TO PUT A STOP TO THIS.

Online businesses run websites selling fear of EMF. Googling “electrosmog” reveals many such revenue generators, all of which make baseless claims of alleged health effects and feature a prominent “DONATE” button. They do real harm by distracting from actual dangers (e.g., global warming). These sites most often focus on “opinion” studies with no dosimetry (no measurement of actual EMF exposure, just self-reported recollection of subjective proximity to devices) and no clinical assessment of very common symptoms they attribute without evidence to EMF. Claims of health effects with no actual dose measurements or clinical assessment is not credible. Some people believe they are “hypersensitive” to EMFs, but there’s no evidence to back it up; Rubin, G. James; Hillert, Lena; Nieto-Hernandez, Rosa; van Rongen, Eric; Oftedal, Gunnhild (December 2011). "Do people with idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields display physiological effects when exposed to electromagnetic fields?". Bioelectromagnetics. 32 (8): 593–609). Bioeffects from exposure to very high levels of microwave radiation are well understood (tissue heats up – basis of microwave cooking). Levels to which members of the public are exposed are far too low to have any effects. The recognized exposure limits adequately protect the public. Actual exposures are well below the exposure limits. See e.g., Bushberg JT and Butcher MJ. Measurement of ambient millimeter wave exposures levels around small base stations (January 2025). Health Physics 128(2):1-7. Those running “electrosmog” sites point to the “NTP study” as a scientific basis of their claims that cell phone radiation causes cancer. They refer to the 2018 National Toxicology Program Report on mice [https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/tr596] and rats [https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/tr595] exposed to RF used by cell phones. Rodents were exposed to levels near the public exposure limits for 9 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 2 years. These studies showed no statistically significant effects on female mice, male mice, or female rats, and a HUGE increase in life span for the exposed male rats. Thermal effects can explain the significant effects in the rats. See e.g., Kuhne J, Schmidt JA, Geschwentner D, Pophof B, Ziegelberger G. Thermoregulatory Stress as Potential Mediating Factor in the NTP Cell Phone Tumor Study. Bioelectromagnetics. 2020 Sep;41(6):471-479 [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7522680/]. The NTP study also found a small number of rare heart tumors in the warmed male rats, but not in the mice or female rats. The NTP researchers did not control for warming the male rats (i.e., the controls were not heated the way the exposed rats were), so the most obvious explanation for the tiny number of excess heart tumors is that the exposed male rats heated up more than the mice or female rats. The study’s own peer reviewers noted “…panelists agreed that information to specifically rule out a thermal or non-thermal effect was insufficient.” (NTP TR595 p. 420). A review of the NTP study by internationally-recognized scientific experts on RF effects noted “…substantial limitations preclude conclusions being drawn concerning RF EMFs and carcinogenesis” and “…a preponderance of reported effects in the male rats, whose body core temperature would have increased more than either the female rats or either male or female mice (due to their smaller surface area-to-mass ratio), which would have put them under greater metabolic stress due to their greater thermoregulatory requirements.” ICNIRP Note on recent animal carcinogenesis studies (2018) [https://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPnote2018.pdf] John Bucher, the lead writer on the NTP report, noted that he is not changing his cellphone use or asking his family to, and that the findings of the rare nerve-tissue tumor found in the hearts of male rats does not mean humans should be worried. [https://learningenglish.voanews.com/a/health-lifestyles-researchers-say-no-cancer-from-cellphone-use/4244699.html] Far from being clear evidence, the NTP study shows no effect on mice and most significantly a huge increase in male rat lifespan. The tiny number of heart tumors in the exposed rats could most rationally be explained by tissue heating. Electrosmog sites claim cell phones cause cancer and point to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 2011 classification of radiofrequency as “possibly carcinogenic” [https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf], without mentioning that IARC’s “possibly” category has the lowest certainty of any IARC rating (below “probable” and “known” carcinogen categories), and that the “possible” rating includes things like aloe vera and ginkgo biloba. See attached file for full response

207 mW/cm² RF Exposure 24/7 on Elderly (See the attached PDF) October 20, 2026 Margarette Lisa Long 600 Coffman St. #220 Longmont, CO 80501 541-631-8907 Subject: Unequal Protection from RF Radiation in Longmont, CO Dear FCC and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Thank you for addressing this important manner to protect humanities health. Why do other countries protect the health of their citizens more than our great country? I am a resident of The Village on Main, a federally subsidized low-income housing complex in Longmont, Colorado. Our building is located directly across from a cell tower and experiences continuous radio frequency (RF) exposure, measured indoors at approximately 20.7 µW/cm², 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Through my research, I have discovered that government and civic buildings in the same area have been shielded from RF exposure (shown in green on the attached map), while residential and low-income housing buildings remain unshielded (shown in red), despite being much closer to the towers. This raises serious health and environmental justice concerns: Low-income, elderly, and disabled residents are left disproportionately exposed while protections are provided to government employees. The exposure in my building exceeds Russia’s national safety limit of 10 µW/cm² and is significantly above precautionary limits in other countries. The 2021 D.C. Circuit Court ruling (EHT v. FCC) found that the FCC failed to adequately review health impacts of chronic, low-level RF exposure, underscoring the need for state-level action. I respectfully request: The US adopts the precautionary principle including non-thermal effects standards like China, Italy, Poland, Russia and Eastern Europe of safety limit of 10 µW/cm² max. Also: An investigation into this unequal application of shielding protections. Equitable RF protections for residents of federally subsidized housing. Development of state-level RF exposure guidance that prioritizes vulnerable populations. Shielding technology already exists and has been applied — it must be applied equitably. Residents should not be treated as second-class citizens when it comes to health protections. After moving in here I woke up everyday for 6 months feeling every cell in my body aching. I shielded my apartment and that feeling when away immediately. I live next to many elderly in their 80’s and 90’s. They don’t have the resources or time and energy to shield their units. This is a crime on humanity. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. Neurobehavioral Effects Among Inhabitants Around Mobile Phone Base Stations. Abdel-Rassoul, G., et al. NeuroToxicology 28(2):434-440. (2007). Sincerely, Margarette Lisa Long WE LIVE HERE 24/7 >>>>>>> Regulatory limits are based on time-averaged exposure (commonly a 6-minute average).

Wireless radiation gives me headaches and tinnitus, and I would like their detrimental effects looked into further and better regulated. Thank you.

heed the evidence and stop taking money. stop your corporate money influences cold and respect the rest of the earth and humanity.

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 and personal experience (patient). As a health professional, I am aware that the FCC rules do not take into account the current research regarding health impacts of currently used frequency bands and intensities of exposure. The rules were set up when there was minimal research, and frequency bands used were much fewer G’s. Also, general exposure was much less 2 or 3 decades ago. The current exposure levels were unimagined several decades ago. It is well past time the health impacts be studied and FCC rules be adjusted appropriately to well done research. Community input is also very essential for siting of towers. The local folks are the ones that are living with the exposure, and it is important they be given a say. They are generally not compensated for the presence of a tower/exposure, unless they are hosting the tower. It is not uncommon for a tower ‘host’ to not be living in the host location. Personally, I have had to make significant educational and tool expenditures to mitigate EMF exposure effects in my home environment. Multiple migraines per day arrived with a new EMF exposure, along with a notable decline in cognitive function, memory, and capacity to meet complexities of daily life with aplomb. 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 one of the growing number of people who has had my life disrupted from wireless devices, even though these common devices meet the current FCC guidelines. I became ill in 2012 when a smart meter was installed on my home with no notification of dangers to my health. I became ill with a condition known as Electromagnetic Sensitivity, which sounds mild enough, but has been a devastating life change. I have been misled by the US government, the FCC, and the wireless industry who state that the radiation that made me ill is safe. It is unusual to recover from this condition once one has become seriously ill as I have. When I am exposed to radiation from wireless sources such as cell phones, wi-fi, cell towers, wireless smart meters, and other wireless devices, I experience adverse health effects including headache, nausea, dizziness, exhaustion just from brief exposures. Brief exposures take three days or more to recover from. If the exposure is longer, even at very low levels of radio frequency radiation, recovery can take three to six months during which I am too ill to risk leaving my house. Longer exposures cause a headache which does not resolve for months, prolonged dizziness and profound exhaustion along with skin rashes, insomnia, systemic edema, metal confusion and difficulty concentrating, stomach and joint pain, and irritability among other symptoms. Recovery is slow and partial, it does not return me to health, just a more functional level of existence. Before the effects on my life from developing wireless radiation sickness I enjoyed an active social and creative life. I painted and exhibited my work in galleries. I enjoyed social dancing and was taking five dance classes a week learning tango and salsa that I drove an hour away from home for. These activities are no long possible. Once the smart meter was installed I became so seriously ill that I could barely care for myself and repeatedly requested that the utility company remove the meter. I was diagnosed with Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, but my doctor's letter was ignored by Edison. Finally, nine months later an analogue meter was installed and I assumed I would get well. That did not happen. It was necessary to totally change my life. I had to get rid of my mobile phone, cordless phones, microwave oven, and now have to sit over two feet away in order to use my wired computer and have to be three feet away from electric appliances in order to use them. I can not travel anywhere in a car without reacting to cell towers. I can not go into stores because of wi-fi. I can not go anywhere in public, church, concerts, art galleries, etc. because almost everyone carries a cell phone. At this point I am confined to my house. Friends shop for food and deliver it for me. I only leave my home a few times a year for dental and eye appointments. I have consultations with my physician by phone to limit exposures. I am very isolated from direct human contact. The FCC adopted its human exposure guidelines in 1996 based on science from the 1980's. This ignores the large and growing body of science showing biological harm even at non-thermal levels. Please read and respond to the link to one of these studies below. Becoming Electro-Hypersensitive: A Replication Study. Dieudonne, M. Bioelectromagnetic 40:188-200. (2019). 

We the people have a right to know about the EMF emissions. Where they are, how much, and the affects on our bodies. We this cou try and our congressmen working for we the people, need to put a stop to these EMFs, they are making us sick. STOP EMFs now.

Dangerous to human health ...military grade weapons.microwaves emitting far beyond safety levels must be made illegal and taken out of our comunitys Now for the sake of humanity

I am very interested in EMF regulation. Our world envelops us more and more with EMFs and no way to avoid exposure. I think public education is needed to make everyone aware of this invisible danger to our health and learn of ways to mitigate it. If EMFs could be minimized rather than maximized in smart meters, appliances, cell phones, cars, etc then we could live healthier lives. Rather than having connectivity be prioritized, I would love a world where our health is the priority.