Exposure limits & oversight

I request a comprehensive, independent evaluation of the potential health effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure from wireless technologies, particularly for children, pregnant women, developing fetuses, and communities near wireless infrastructure. As cell towers, small-cell antennas, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and mobile devices become increasingly widespread, public health protections must keep pace. HHS should assess whether current exposure standards adequately address long-term, cumulative exposure and potentially vulnerable populations. 1. Cancer and long-term exposure I urge HHS to review evidence concerning RF-EMF exposure and cancer, including brain tumors and childhood cancers. Research should consider exposure duration, intensity, frequency, age at first exposure, and proximity to transmitting infrastructure. HHS should distinguish established findings from unresolved questions and identify gaps requiring further long-term research. The absence of conclusive evidence of harm in one exposure scenario should not be interpreted as proof that all scenarios have been adequately studied. 2. Pregnancy, birth defects, and fetal development I request an evaluation of human and experimental evidence concerning RF-EMF exposure and miscarriage, congenital abnormalities, fetal growth, premature birth, and other adverse pregnancy outcomes. Research should account for confounding factors, accurately assess exposure, and clearly explain limitations. Pregnant women deserve transparent, evidence-based guidance on known risks, uncertainties, and reasonable exposure-reduction measures. 3. Children’s brain development Children warrant particular consideration because their brains and nervous systems are developing and their potential exposure may span decades. HHS should prioritize research into possible effects on neurological development, cognition, memory, attention, learning, behavior, and sleep. Studies should distinguish prenatal, childhood, and adolescent exposure and examine cumulative exposure from multiple sources. Long-term studies using objective exposure measurements, appropriate comparison groups, and independent oversight are essential. 4. Setback distances from schools, hospitals, childcare facilities, and homes HHS should evaluate whether minimum separation distances or additional siting safeguards are scientifically justified for cell towers, small-cell antennas, rooftop antennas, and other wireless infrastructure near schools, daycares, hospitals, maternity facilities, and residential neighborhoods. Specifically, HHS should: * Review studies linking proximity to transmitting infrastructure with health outcomes, accounting for measured exposure and antenna characteristics. * Compare U.S. exposure standards and siting practices with international standards and precautionary policies. * Evaluate cumulative exposure from multiple transmitters. * Consider additional protections for children, pregnant women, neonatal units, and other potentially vulnerable populations. * Recommend pre-installation assessments and independent post-installation exposure measurements, with results publicly accessible. * Determine whether minimum setbacks are justified and, if so, recommend distances appropriate to the facility type and exposure conditions. I recognize that distance alone does not determine exposure. Nevertheless, HHS should explicitly evaluate whether distance-based protections are warranted. Where evidence is insufficient, the agency should identify research gaps and consider proportionate precautionary measures while further studies are conducted. 5. Review of current exposure standards HHS should assess whether current U.S. RF exposure limits adequately address prolonged exposure, realistic living conditions, multiple simultaneous sources, and different stages of human development. The review should distinguish established effects from possible effects under investigation and findings that have not been consistently replicated. Compliance testing should reflect realistic conditions in homes, schools, workplaces, and healthcare facilities. 6. Independent research and transparency HHS should prioritize rigorous, independently funded research with transparent conflict-of-interest disclosures. Priorities should include cancer, reproductive outcomes, prenatal development, childhood neurological health, cumulative exposure, and the effectiveness of exposure-reduction and siting measures. HHS should publish its assessments, explain how conflicting findings are evaluated, and make results accessible to families, schools, healthcare providers, and local governments. Thank you for considering my comments.

We have our entire home hardwired to avoid wifi. I am very sensitive to EMF's. I get bad headaches, severe ear ringing, insomnia, a bad feeling in my head, and my eyes will hurt when exposed to this radiation. I have had problems with cellphones. My hand, wrist, and arm will become numb when using my cellphone. I bought a new Samsung S25 cellphone about 2 yrs ago and had to return it due to severe effects from this cellphone. I developed breast cancer when I worked at a hospital with many cells on their roof. Many nurses got cancer working there. I also became very ill when visiting Las Vegas and walking the street with the 5G small cells on every corner. I developed a severe headache and nose bleed from this. My father got very sick when a cell tower was installed close to his senior apartment building. He developed lymphocytic leukemia, severe insomnia, and horrible headaches from this radiation. The readings were sky high on my EMF meter when I took a reading in his apartment. Please regulate cellphones as my EMF meter registers high readings from my husband's and my cellphone. We havea cell tower 1 mile from our home. I cannot walk near there without bad symptoms.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a , parent, myself, healthcare professional, researcher, advocate, concerned member of the public, or other]. wireless radiation has affected me significantly and also i am concerned about my child, and entire family that I care about. The continues exposure from everywhere is unjust since there is no escape from it. I am very signifantly sensitive to is and the measures that I am taking are not enough. I am buying expensive clothes and blankets to shield myself but I am still significantly affected. It's not right that my life became a hell now without my consent and ability to opt out. The exposure is crazy and new towers continue to grow everywhere. This needs to stop and it is unlawful because it affects everyone without asking for acceptance. I do not consent and do not accept being continuously exposed to this radiation. 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.

This documentary argues that the rollout of fifth-generation wireless technology (5G) poses a serious threat to human health, privacy, and freedom. Its central claims are that 5G technology is not merely intended to improve telecommunications, but could also be used for surveillance, population control, and potentially harmful biological effects. It presents these concerns through interviews with activists, people described as weapons experts, and individuals discussing biology and electromagnetic radiation. The film combines three main lines of argument: Health: Wireless radiation may have biological effects that the public is not adequately informed about. Technology and control: An increasingly connected society could make surveillance and centralized control easier. Political accountability: Governments, regulators, and telecommunications companies should face greater scrutiny over the deployment of new wireless infrastructure. The documentary uses urgent language and interviews to encourage viewers to oppose what it portrays as a dangerous technological development. 5G Apocalypse https://youtu.be/ZX4yclXvcts?is=X8yYIoqdfOhDbUF2

STOP 5G/6G radiation. I hope you all are held accountable for radiation poisoning! CV cover up and we all know. STOP ALL EMF, RF

Hello, I am responding as an individual and I would like to explain my experience with EMFs. I used to have the internet equipment (router, modem etc.) all in my bedroom and soon after it was installed I noticed my sleep suffer immensely. Not only was my insomnia terrible but I started getting other symptoms; brain fog, low energy, low mood, low drive, low libido etc. I was always exhausted and fatigued, I barely had the energy to go for a walk. I came across a podcast that talked about EMF radiation and some of its effects and then I realized that I might be the victim of that. I had my internet service provider move all the equipment to another room and slowly my symptoms went away and I felt like a new man. If I didn't come across that podcast I would have never guessed what it was. Since then I have read books, articles, listened to podcasts etc. about EMF radiation and there is no doubt that it is harmful to both humans and animals and it is also a carcinogen. The terrible part is that we are all surrounded by this everyday with phones, wifi, smart devices, towers etc. Our poor children are exposed to all this plus at school with all their devices and air pods that use to listen to music. It is frying their brain and could cause irreversible damage to them. There are thousands of studies confirming it's negative effects yet there is nothing done about it. I would like to share some links to studies: https://greenmedinfo.com/problematic-action/electromagnetic-field-harms (list of studies, there are more than this on other websites) https://greenmedinfo.com/abstracts/use-bed-insulating-system-electromagnetic-fields-improves-immune-function-redo https://greenmedinfo.com/abstracts/hearing-aid-users-may-be-risk-high-electromagnetic-field-exposure-may-be-accom https://greenmedinfo.com/abstracts/long-term-occupational-exposure-elf-emfs-likely-cause-genotoxic-effects These are just a few out of thousands!!! Again, we know they are harmful. Now we need restrictions and safety measures in place to reduce the amount of damage that people are getting from this exposure. Federal health agencies should consider the power of the tower or device being constructed and calculate the radius at which it will do harm. then construct it at a location where there is minimal people and animals. At the very least the FCC needs to review and update its guidelines to minimize the harm that people are subjugated to. Thank you for allowing us to comment on this matter.

You ignored scientist and doctors warning you of the dangers for YEARS. We know the damage it causes to our health and well being. Shame on you - stop 5g and the even More inhumane 6g.

Secretary Kennedy, please protect us from EMF radiation caused by our exposure to technology! Save us and our children from the consequences of wireless radiation!

Secretary Kennedy, please protect us from EMF radiation caused by our exposure to technology! Save us and our children from the consequences of wireless radiation!

Secretary Kennedy, please protect us from EMF radiation caused by our exposure to technology! Save us and our children from the consequences of wireless radiation!