Exposure limits & oversight

HHS must stop the proliferation of wireless radiation. My life was drastically impacted and my health shattered by RF exposures, beginning with smart meters, and continuing with cell towers, wi-fi and 5G/5GE sources, which keep getting closer - an 85 mile orbit at present- and which do not stop. I had a perfectly healthy heart. As a result of these RF emissions, I now have cardiac disease, insomnia, extreme headaches, microwave hearing and multiple symptoms. Many of my life activities have been stopped due to my needing to minimize wireless exposure. As a healthcare provider, I see many patients with symptoms of wireless injury. HHS must halt and retract the exposures that we citizens are exposed to daily and have no options for avoiding.

Non-thermal radiofrequency radiation is entropic waste. It is a fidelity stressor that disrupts the critical timing components of biology, and what it produces is bioelectrical dissonance and a meta-disease state. The evidence is already on the record. NTP and the Ramazzini Institute found the same rare heart tumor. The WHO-commissioned review rated glioma and heart schwannoma high-certainty. The FCC's own 2 mm tests hit 5.2 W/kg. Europe moves body testing to 0 mm by March 7, 2028. HHS should act now, and the end game is Li-Fi compatibility through the Clean Ether Act. Comment of John Coates on Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397. Individual respondent. My full comment, with sources, is attached: It answers Questions 2 through 18, with every subpart, in order. THE EVIDENCE IS ALREADY ON THE RECORD (Q6, Q12). - NTP and Ramazzini, two independent lifetime bioassays, found the same rare tumor, malignant heart schwannoma, in male rats. Germany's BfS called Ramazzini's exposures "at a comparable level to the basic limit values for humans." - The WHO-commissioned review: "The CoE for an increased risk in glioma was judged as high." Heart schwannoma was rated high too. - NTP held heating under 1 degree C, and NTP itself says: "The role of thermal changes on cancer development needs to be further investigated." GSM gliomas ran 0, 3, 3 and 2 per 90 across sham, 1.5, 3 and 6 W/kg. Heat does not draw that curve. HHS should fund the investigation NTP called for. - NTP's 1.5 W/kg is a whole-body average; the FCC's 1.6 W/kg limit is a 1-gram local peak. Different measures, but the numbers sit right on top of each other. The iPhone Air's 1.60 W/kg is the highest simultaneous-transmission value reported in its FCC grant. THE TEST MISSES THE BODY (Q5(p), Q7, Q8, Q9). - The FCC's own 2019 tests at 2 mm recorded up to 5.2 W/kg. - Europe moves body testing to 0 mm by March 7, 2028. The U.S. still certifies at typically 5 to 15 mm. - SAR averages away the timing biology reads: GSM bursts about 217 times a second, Wi-Fi beacons about ten times a second, DECT and 5G NR use 10 ms frames. - Require 0 mm testing, and disclose test distance and pulse structure with every SAR value. THE META-DISEASE STATE (Q10, Q12). RF does not need to cause one unique disease to matter. It only needs to reduce the fidelity of the systems that prevent many diseases. Bioelectrical dissonance is the process, low-fidelity biology is the state, and disease susceptibility is the consequence. The causal fingerprint is not one diagnosis. It is a shifted distribution of biological failure: rare becomes less rare, late becomes early, recoverable becomes persistent. S4-MITO-SPIN (Q12). The S4 helix of the VGCCs, including CACNA1C, is the bulk-calcium gate; Cyb5b is the internal-timing transducer (Kim et al., Cell, 2026: "an essential mediator likely acting as an EMF sensor"); mitochondria are the redox amplifier (95% of 131 non-thermal studies found oxidative effects); cryptochrome-to-flavins spin dynamics are the modulator. At matched SAR, pulse modulation, not the carrier, changed human EEG and blood flow. HHS should test whether pulsed exposure disrupts pulsatile insulin release, which runs on the same calcium machinery. SENSITIVE POPULATIONS (Q11). Development has no restore point. Children absorb higher local doses; NTP pups were born smaller; responses differ by CACNA1C genotype and mouse strain; aging neurons carry more L-type calcium channels. WHAT I ASK (Q5, Q15, Q16, Q17, Q18). - Reinvigorate Public Law 90-602. It is HHS's job. The Secretary "shall establish and carry out an electronic product radiation control program" and develop techniques "for minimizing exposure." Publish the performance-standard determination and a public work plan; replace FDA's tumor-only 2020 review. - Run the meta-disease experiment: pulsed RF vs carrier-only vs sham at matched SAR, from the womb, measuring fidelity endpoints before pathology (NIEHS/NTP). - Fund Cyb5b, CACNA1C and organoid replication (NIH); build registries and measured-exposure cohorts (CDC); issue precautionary guidance now. - Repeal Section 704, which bars localities from weighing RF health effects in siting. - Pass the Clean Ether Act: fiber, Ethernet and Li-Fi on IEEE 802.11bb indoors, with pilots in Head Start, childcare, maternity and pediatric care, and HHS facilities. Invisible does not mean irrelevant. Non-ionizing does not mean non-biological. Legal does not mean safe. I was diagnosed with kidney cancer at age 7 in 1977, with my left kidney removed at age 8, while my family lived near a radar installation on a military base. In 1995 my daughter Angel Leigh was born with anencephaly and did not survive. My daughter was the canary in the coal mine... and so was I. John Coates RF Safe

I am extremely concerned that the information sought in this public comment forum will be used as some sort of factual documentation of the lack of EMF harm to promote a message that 765kv transmissions are "perfectly safe" when we have not had the scale that is being proposed,EVER in the US before to even study like we need to BEFORE this crazy level of new construction is approved by PJM. Are we going to experiment on people in the US and then realize like we did with lead and asbestos exposure how wrong we were? There are several countries that DO recognize the need for setbacks and this is what any governing body that cares about our kids and vulnerable population would be seeking for our citizens. There are other countries who have documented trends of leukemia for children living close to high voltage lines. Why is this not being researched and considered? Please do not use this study against the people of the US to push transmission lines on us and attempt to negate our concerns. Keep transmission lines away from schools, parks and houses. Keep them away from anywhere animals are living and grazing. Please at the very least use the feedback here to establish safe setbacks at a bare minimum of 1000 feet.

We the People have claimed for decades that we are being harmed by the deployment of radio and satellite communications systems that lack safety regulations, and we’ve been ignored - in favor of profits and shareholders. There has been no safety standards review since 1996. 
Meanwhile, We the People have endured a relentless 30 year escalation of tech - now well beyond gigahertz, and into the millimeter wave and terahertz levels. i am a longterm EHS (electro-hyper-sensitive) and HSP (highly sensitive person), and i have actively watched the proliferation of cell towers, satellites, and new technology deployments ever since 2010 - when i first noticed that being on the computer quickly zapped all my energy and gave me headaches, stomach aches, joint pains, palpitations, severe leg cramps, and increasing irritability. The headaches, palpitations, and body pains became constant for me as the grid grew.
i am not alone in this. 
Between 2010-2017, i discovered key places on the highway where i would repeatedly have to fight to stay awake. Then, there was the constant stress of being electrocuted - like live wires were running painful current through my body all the time. At times it was as if i was struck by lightning and unable to function normally for weeks at a time. The worst headaches imaginable became constant for me, and my brain has even been shocked to a stupor for months at a time. 
Then everything hurts, and i can’t move. My worst episodes seemed for years to correlate to large satellite deployments into space - my body acutely suffers when electromagnetic forces are amplified and accelerated, and i feel immense suffocating weight pressing into me, compressing my organs and taking my breath away. 
i’ve also suffered 6 eardrum ruptures since 2017.
i’ve moved numerous times to try to escape, but to no avail. Last year, in January 2025, when new cell towers popped up across the street from my home, i went down hard and fast. Severe racing heart; freezing cold and curled in a ball - unable to regulate temperature, muscle activity, breath, heart rate, even a single thought - and unable to speak coherently for several weeks. In my experience as a brain therapist, my symptoms and the recovery was a lot like post-stroke, and it took me 8 months last year to function at base level again. Now, the episodes are relentless: every time they add repeaters and densifiers and other assorted infrastructure to the towers and poles, i go down hard all over again.
i’ve lost much of this year to emf poisoning too. That’s 2 years of lost work, all directly connected to the towers and their expansion. 
i have now joined more than hundred million wi-fi refugees in being forced to leave my home and move to a rural place, where i won’t have to live under this deadly infrastructure any more. i have also done more research and written more articles on the dangers of these unregulated technologies than any holistic healer should have to - because people have to know - that what we can’t see, but can measure, is hurting us. The physical, emotional, and psychological costs are extreme - and reversible only up to a certain point, at which time neurodegenerative damage turns to decay and for many, even death. 

This unseen epidemic of electromagnetic poisoning must stop. It is long past time to pause, review the standards, and find ways to communicate that don’t cost people, animals, plants, and insects their lives. Attached are research and writings to substantiate my claims. By: Yolanda Marie Vazquez, All Rights Reserved, Auburn California 10/2026 Attached files:
 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6560/ae97ac 
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11111148/: Ear Ruptures
https://yolandapritamhari.substack.com/p/membrane-damage-in-the-grip-of-the?utm_source=publication-search 2025 tower deployment https://yolandapritamhari.substack.com/p/when-the-axe-falls-1-this-writer?utm_source=publication-search Sacramento summer 2026 https://yolandapritamhari.substack.com/p/the-bigger-they-grow-the-downer-we?utm_source=publication-search

I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. Here is just one study I believe the FCC should review when addressing the concerns about wireless radiation: * Panagopoulos et al. (2021):Human-made electromagnetic fields: Ion forced-oscillation and voltage-gated ion channel dysfunction, oxidative stress and DNA damage – Reviewed evidence and proposed mechanisms linking human-made electromagnetic fields to oxidative stress, DNA damage, and cellular dysfunction. https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/ijo.2021.5272 The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: I have been aware of negative effects of electromagnetic fields and wireless radiation for over a decade. As an engineer in the automotive industry, I worked in an office where within an hour of my arrival, I developed headaches, brain fog, sinus congestion, dizziness and nausea. People who came into my office for meetings would also develop similar symptoms. I quickly realized that something environmental was having an impact so I called Plant Engineering and asked them to come and measure the electromagnetic fields and radiation in the office. While the engineer determined that the readings were within OSHA guidelines, he explained they were high and due to a power closet next door a bank of backup batteries under the floor and an abundance of wireless routers in the area. I went to my Director, presented the information and asked to move to another office where the Plant Engineer verified the measurements were near zero. Once I moved offices, my symptoms disappeared. Since then, I am as careful as I can be about exposing myself to these invisible and invasive pollutants. I had to purchase a phone case with radiation protection to mitigate cell phone radiation that caused my hand to numb and tingle. Also, I had a substantial decline in my health since the rollout of 5G. I experienced a rapid increase in the frequency of migraines, respiratory illness, brain fog, and insomnia. I have seen a rapid increase in mold on food and outdoor plants and in my home. My research has indicated these are all side effects of cell tower and other radiation. I have done things in my home and with my health care regimen to offset this at great expense. I am very concerned about the unfettered rollout and long term consequences to not only human health but health of the planet. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.

I appreciate the opportunity to submit formal comments in response to the Department of Health and Human Services’ Request for Information (RFI) regarding Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) and Radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure. As federal agencies evaluate modern wireless infrastructure, it is critical that public health guidelines shift from evaluating purely thermal, acute effects to addressing the mounting body of evidence surrounding non-thermal, chronic biological impacts. The systemic integration of high-density wireless technologies—including macro cell towers, small cell deployments, and widespread commercial wireless infrastructure—has fundamentally altered the ambient radiation environment. A rigorous, independent review of the current science reveals several critical areas of concern that the Department should formally address: • Non-Thermal Biological Effects: A significant body of independent, peer-reviewed literature demonstrates that chronic exposure to low-intensity, non-thermal RF radiation can induce biological stress. These documented effects include oxidative stress, cellular DNA damage, metabolic disruption, and changes to blood-brain barrier permeability, occurring at levels far below current federal safety thresholds. • Vulnerability of Developing Children: Regulatory safety margins must be updated to account for distinct physiological differences in vulnerable populations. Research indicates that children absorb higher relative doses of RF radiation into deeper brain tissue due to thinner skulls, higher tissue conductivity, and smaller physical stature. Chronic exposure near schools and residential zones represents an unquantified multi-decadal health risk. • Flaws in Aggregate Exposure Models: Current safety guidelines generally evaluate isolated exposure from a single device or antenna. They fail to model the cumulative, multi-frequency environment where individuals are simultaneously exposed to macro-towers, localized small cells, smart utility meters, and indoor Wi-Fi networks 24 hours a day. • Environmental and Wildlife Disruption: Beyond human health, the expansion of high-frequency wireless infrastructure introduces unique ecological pressures. Peer-reviewed studies suggest that ambient RF fields can disrupt the navigation, behavior, and reproductive health of critical insect populations, migratory birds, and bees. Recommendations for the Department: 1. Adopt the Precautionary Principle: Implement exposure guidelines that err on the side of public safety, rather than waiting for absolute definitive proof of widespread clinical harm. 2. Fund Independent Long-Term Studies: Commission comprehensive, epidemiological studies completely isolated from telecommunications industry funding or influence. 3. Establish Environmentally Safe Zones: Protect residential neighborhoods, medical facilities, and educational institutions by recommending strict structural setbacks from high-output wireless transmitters. Thank you for your rigorous attention to this pressing public health issue and for thoroughly evaluating the independent scientific data during this inquiry. Sincerely, Dawn Quirk

Strong manmade wireless radiation damages all living things. The biological effects have been known for many years. saferemr.com bioinitiative.org The race to saturate the earth over the last 30yrs may have had many different motives, but it has thrived on public ignorance. Nature already had the perfect balance of electricity in all things, now it is hard to find a natural place. EMR & RFR causes chaos in molecules, disturbing & damaging natural function. Radiation sickness is now common as emissions are now hard to avoid. Blood, brain, heart and body functions are all immediately affected by exposure to wireless fields. I have witnessed hundreds of people suffering with conditions and cancers. The industry needs to be regulated. There needs to be rules. There needs to be balance. Only low radiation products should be allowed. Irradiating should be a crime. There should be routine testing of RFR & EMR levels in all areas. There should be information & education. There should be consent/choice/options. There should be safe areas/low radiation zones in all buildings/transport/parks etc. There should be more shielding in products and in public places. Thank You.

Due to recent upgrades in utility lines by ComEd, our electric utility in a Chicago suburb, my backyard now reads as hazardous on my EMF meter. I have tried several different meters and I get the same readings. I called ComEd and asked them to take readings. Their readings agreed with mine but they didn't do anything about it. I have read that a China and Russia have emf limits 100 times stricter than ours. It is unacceptable that my family and I must experience unsafe levels of radiation in our back yard just because the government is over 20 years behind the times in adopting radiation standards.

I urge the Department of Health and Human Services to take immediate, independent action to evaluate the potential health effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation and electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. Regulatory inaction is unacceptable when scientific questions remain and public exposure continues to increase. We must not repeat the mistakes of the tobacco industry, where warnings and scientific concerns were met with years of delay while the public remained exposed. The comparison is about regulatory responsibility—not a claim that the evidence on wireless radiation is identical to the evidence on tobacco. Scientific evidence warrants serious attention. In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified RF electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). The U.S. National Toxicology Program’s animal studies reported evidence of certain tumors associated with cell-phone RF exposure. More recent systematic reviews have found no clear increase in some cancers examined, underscoring the need for continued independent research rather than complacency. Research also raises questions about reproductive health and biological effects. A 2024 systematic review by Cordelli and colleagues examined RF exposure and male fertility, including evidence from animal studies and human sperm in vitro. Grimaldi and colleagues reported in 1997 that exposure to 50-Hz electromagnetic fields affected Epstein–Barr virus antigen expression in a laboratory cell model. These findings do not establish that everyday wireless exposure causes disease, but they demonstrate why biological effects deserve rigorous investigation. The scientific literature must be evaluated objectively, including evidence of harm, evidence of no effect, and uncertainties. Research should be independent of industry influence, transparent, reproducible, and sufficiently funded to address long-term and cumulative exposure. I call on HHS to take the following actions immediately: 1. Commission an independent, comprehensive review of peer-reviewed research on RF radiation and EMF exposure, including cancer, reproductive health, neurological effects, and other potential biological impacts. 2. Reassess whether current exposure limits adequately reflect the scientific evidence, including uncertainties regarding long-term and cumulative exposure. 3. Increase funding for independent research and long-term studies, with particular attention to children, pregnancy, and other potentially vulnerable populations. 4. Improve public education and transparency about exposure sources, scientific uncertainties, and practical ways to reduce unnecessary exposure. 5. Establish clear timelines for review, public reporting, and regulatory action. The absence of definitive proof of harm is not proof of safety. HHS must not wait for incontrovertible evidence of widespread harm before acting responsibly. The public deserves transparent science, independent oversight, and precautionary policies that put health ahead of commercial interests. Relevant peer-reviewed research and sources • Baan R, et al. Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. The Lancet Oncology. 2011;12(7):624–626. • National Toxicology Program. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of cell-phone radiofrequency radiation. Technical Reports 595 and 596, 2018. • Karipidis K, et al. The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A systematic review of human observational studies. Environment International. 2024;191:108983. • Cordelli E, et al. Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on male fertility: A systematic review of experimental studies. Environment International. 2024;185:108509. • Grimaldi S, et al. 50 Hz electromagnetic fields induce changes in the expression of Epstein-Barr virus early antigens in a cell line. Journal of Environmental Pathology, Toxicology and Oncology. 1997;16(2–3):205–207. • Environmental Health Trust: Wireless Radiation Health Effects Research • National Toxicology Program: Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation Studies I urge HHS to act now, prioritize public health, and ensure that wireless technology policy is guided by independent science rather than delayed until preventable harm becomes undeniable.

Being on a cell pjone bothers me. Talking on one creates a jarring, unpleasant sensation that makes it difficult to concentrate. This lasts for hours after a call. A cell phone on the console net to me in a car makes my right leg very weak. To a lesser extent, the same thing happens to me when I'm on a landline talking to someone on a cell phone. I can tolerate this for about 30 minutes. Some cell phones are worse than others. One cell phone I connect to is so bad I cannot tolerate even a few seconds or connection. I cannot even listen to voice messages from that cell phone. I strongly urge the FCC to update their standards on safe levels of wireless 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 the experience of individuals with electrical hypersensitivity, the effects of wireless radiation on other vulnerable populations and on the environment. Then, establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing me with an opportunity to be heard. Karen Perrin