Exposure limits & oversight

“I hope that HHS will use this opportunity to create a comprehensive report on the current medical, biological, and public health knowledge regarding these effects and take action on that. Please consider the experiences of those affected by this radiation as part of what is reviewed to come up with what should be the scientific underpinnings to actual protective standards and action by the federal government.”

I am writing as a concerned parent of three young children to express my support for greater research, transparency, and public awareness regarding electromagnetic fields (EMFs), radiofrequency (RF) radiation, and wireless radiation exposure. Our children are growing up in an environment with nearly constant exposure to wireless technologies, including Wi-Fi routers, cell phones, tablets, smart devices, and wireless systems in schools. While these technologies provide many benefits, I believe we need a better understanding of the potential long-term health effects of cumulative exposure, particularly for developing children. I respectfully urge federal agencies to: * Prioritize independent, long-term studies examining chronic RF exposure, particularly in children and other potentially vulnerable populations. * Investigate potential biological effects beyond tissue heating, while carefully evaluating the quality and reproducibility of the evidence. * Reevaluate current safety standards in light of modern wireless technologies, changing exposure patterns, and emerging scientific findings. * Encourage practical, low-cost exposure reduction measures in schools and homes, including access to wired internet connections when feasible. * Increase public transparency regarding exposure levels, research findings, and the scientific basis for safety guidelines. As a parent, I believe we should not have to choose between technological advancement and taking reasonable precautions to protect our children’s health. I am not advocating for fear or the elimination of wireless technology. I am asking for responsible oversight, rigorous independent research, and a precautionary approach where meaningful scientific uncertainties remain. Our children deserve thoughtful, evidence-based policies that prioritize their long-term health and well-being. Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment.

As a mother of two children living in Sandy, Utah, I am deeply concerned about the cell tower located at Sprucewood Elementary School, where my son attends school. Every day, parents send their children to school trusting that their health, safety, and well-being are being prioritized. Children spend approximately seven hours a day, five days a week, at school during critical stages of physical, cognitive, and neurological development. My greatest concern is the potential long-term impact of radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure on children’s developing brains and nervous systems. Children are not simply small adults. Their brains are still developing, and I believe federal safety standards should specifically account for their unique developmental needs and the possibility of cumulative environmental exposures throughout childhood. While current scientific evidence has not established that exposure from cell towers operating within federal safety limits causes neurological harm, questions remain about long-term exposure beginning early in life. I believe those questions deserve continued independent research and careful consideration. I am especially concerned about the placement of telecommunications equipment directly on elementary school campuses. Even when equipment complies with existing regulations, parents deserve transparency about exposure levels, monitoring procedures, and the decisions that led to its installation. I respectfully request that the Department of Health and Human Services: 1. Prioritize independent research examining the long-term neurological, cognitive, and developmental effects of RF exposure during childhood. 2. Review whether current federal RF exposure guidelines adequately account for children’s developing brains and nervous systems. 3. Encourage independent, publicly accessible RF exposure measurements at elementary schools where cell towers are located. 4. Investigate alternative locations for telecommunications equipment that would reduce unnecessary exposure concerns in school environments. 5. Evaluate whether additional precautionary measures or recommendations regarding cell tower placement on elementary school properties are warranted. 6. Encourage greater parental involvement and transparency when decisions are made about installing or maintaining cell towers on school property. I am specifically requesting that the cell tower at Sprucewood Elementary School in Sandy, Utah, be evaluated for removal or relocation. I understand that wireless technology plays an important role in modern society. However, I also believe technological convenience and infrastructure needs should be balanced with thoughtful consideration of children’s health and development. As a parent, I should not have to wonder whether my child’s daily learning environment has been adequately evaluated for long-term environmental exposure. I am not asking the government to assume that harm has occurred. I am asking for meaningful research, transparency, independent testing, and a precautionary approach when evaluating potential risks to children. Our children only get one childhood, and their developing brains deserve careful consideration when decisions are made about the environments where they spend so much of their lives. Thank you for allowing parents to participate in this important discussion and for considering the health and well-being of future generations.

Thank you very much for giving us all the opportunity to reflect on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am a 52 years old Dutch woman who is elektrosensitive. I became sick in 2009. After years of nearly no sleep I found out that a celltower had been plased in my neigbourhood around the time that my sleepdisorder started. I noticed that my sleep was better when the wifirouter was off at night. And so I graduately became aware of the effects of my surrounding on my health. Because I wanted to know how others with this disorder survived I started collecting stories. And I hoped by publishing these stories in a book that our Dutch government would listen. The book came out in 2017 ("De draadloze kooi"). It has helped a lot of people but our government ignored it. Now I see our government consistently moving away from looking at us. We are an inconvenient truth. Being elektrosensitive doesn't mean that I am against technology. It means knowing how to live with technology without it weakening our health. But with nearly no one being aware of or acknowledging my condition it is very difficult to take part in society. What we need is more awareness about the dangers of EMFs, RF Radiation and Wireless Radiation Exposure, develop healthier products and change the rules of engagement (like with smoking) so our society becomes EHS-inclusive. More practical: The government can launch an awareness campaign, it can regulate the industry better by lowering radiation limits, give incentives to produce healthier products, recognize EHS as an environmental related disorder so people can get the right healthcare and give people with EHS the right to ask for reasonable adaptations if necessary. I hope all the input will give you a clear vision of what to do, and that you will be able to put it all in practice. For a better world for all of us. Thank you very much and good luck.

The government should be requiring all devices that emit radiation to undergo randomized testing and reporting. The emitted levels should be considered healthy or otherwise a warning issued. If no one can decide what is considered healthy, experiments should be conducted and results finalized. There is special concern over wearable devices where there is no long term evidence of safety. Any products with unknown causes of harm should be properly labeled so.

Grok has made this website with SAR data from phones. Maybe the downloadable spreadsheet or the websites search filter can be useful somehow. https://sar-data.grok.me/ Take note that there are different measurement types used in EU and US and in general. Such as head, trunk and limb measurements. But also "1g" and "10g" measurements. The FCC (US), ANFR (France) and BFS (Germany) also have data on SAR you can find. The Grok made website uses data from Apple. Here are the other websites. The FCC has this website, where there is an advanced search tool that may come in handy. https://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/fccid here is Apple. https://regulatoryinfo.apple.com/rfexposure here is the French ANFR. https://data.anfr.fr/explore/dataset/das-telephonie-mobile And the German BSF. https://www.bfs.de/SiteGlobals/Forms/Suche/BfS/EN/SARsuche_Formular.html I think the Grok or other LLM search tools can be easier to use for searching. So long as links are verifiable and sources included.

FCC writing about SAR values. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cell-phones-what-it-means-you "Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) For Cell Phones: What It Means For You" French SAR website ANFR. https://www.anfr.fr/en/maitriser/radio-equipment/specific-absorption-rate-sar/sar-measurement-results "To better inform consumers, ANFR continuously publishing the results of SAR measurements performed since 2012 in open data format as part of its mission to control public exposure to electromagnetic waves and monitor the market. Three types of checks are out performed to assess device compliance “head SAR” measurement covering the use of the phone against the ear, during voice calls. They show that, except for one phone, these SAR values have always been compliant with applicable regulations, i.e. less than 2 W/kg. “trunk SAR” measurements are used whene when the phone is carried near the body, for example in a jacket or a clothes pocket or a bag. The maximum value defined by regulation is 2W/kg but this value is associated with a separation distance between the device under test and the body. For mobile phones, the "trunk" SAR is assessed at a distance of 5 mm for all 6 faces.. “limb SAR" measurements , which correspond to the phone being held against a limb, for example, worn in an armband or in a trouser pocket and held in the hand. The maximum value defined by regulation is 4W/kg. For mobile phones, the "limb" SAR is assessed in contact for all 6 faces. ANFR started checking the “trunk SAR” in 2012, considering the new uses for phones relating to the recommendations to use earphones and relating to data exchange (mobile internet, MMS, etc.). At the time when the European R&TTE directive 1999/5/EC was applicableallowed manufacturers to choose a separation distance of between 0 and 25 mm to measure trunk SAR. This variable distance, was not always mentioned in documentation to users, making control more complex. The preparation of a new directive was opened, giving the possibility of to update the standard It was in this context that between 2012 and 2016, the ANFR performed additional trunk SAR measurements using different distances than the one recommended by manufacturers. These distances could not be used to assess the compliance of devices as they went further than the standard requirements. Therefore, France presented these results to member states and as well as the European Commission as consequence the European regulations for separation distance have been amended. All devices sold in France for which the certification file is later than 25 April 2016, were then assessed for the trunk SAR at a distance that cannot exceed 5 mm. This new standard is easier to check while better reflecting current mobile phone uses. Until July 2020, the regulations imposed SAR compliance measurement to be performed on 'head' and “trunk” . Following the entry into force on 1 July 2020 of the Order of 15 November 2019 on "the display of the specific absorption rate of radio equipment and consumer information", the "limb" SAR is now also required for compliance assessment. The ANFR regularly publishes all new SAR measurements and reports it carries out to guarantee the compliance of radio-electric terminals put on the French market. To find out more: SAR measurements on our data.anfr.fr web site The commented report: as reading these reports can prove complex, this commented and explained version is made available to web users to facilitate its understanding. Quick access Public markets Our other sites Recevoirlatnt.fr Cartoradio.fr Data.anfr.fr Hackathon.anfr.fr Conference.anfr.fr" I kept the other sites in, as they seem EMF related. At least the Data.anfr.fr seems to be. Both the US and Europe has SAR data. But maybe the SAR could be lower or we should use cables more. It is possible to connect your phone to an ethernet cable. With adapters. If every office had ethernet connected phones that would reduce EMF.

We deserve to know the possible effects this has on the human body we are surrounded by it.

Please take down all these antenas most are up since 2020 and now more citizens are getting all kind of sickness. These antenas are killing us...

Our entire country has been blasted with EMF AND RF EXPOSURE. It affects health for all of humanity. We The People want the facts and information surrounding this. We want exactly where this is emitting. State, city, town, right down to what towers or where it’s coming from and why. We want it stopped immediately. This is crimes against humanity. STOP!!