Wi-Fi & indoor exposure

I am an elementary school teacher. I started having nervous system aggravation and tinnitus when cell towers were first being built in the bay area back in 2002. I left the bay area to move to the country where cell towers are not invading my health. My symptoms have decreased. In the past 15 years teachers have been experiencing a huge shift in students abilities to focus in the classroom. I have not met one teacher in the past 5 years who isn't having major issues with students being off task and unable to focus or remember two or even one-step directions. This massive change in students becoming so overly agitated while needing to apply 3 minutes of prolonged focus has become universal in schools. The media influence of students spending excessive hours being exposed to adult violent content on screens is changing how students relate to learning. That alone has caused a huge shift as students completely shut out all education to act disruptive and disrespectful like their heroes on tick-tock. I personally see children coming into school already in fight or flight, because of their overly stimulating busy lifestyle and exposure to wifi radiation. There are questions about the physical safety of the wireless radiation associated with computer use. Building Biology Specialist, Laura Markwardt BBEC, EMRS works to reduce electromagnetic radiation in buildings in order to make environments more healthy for inhabitants. She states that electromagnetic radiation has biological effects on cognition, mood, cardiovascular, and cell function. Laura states that the current FCC guidelines for radiation safety are outdated, arbitrary, and do not take into account the biological effects of the technology (Markwardt, L., 2023). Current legislation demands that the FCC reexamine their safety standards. The Federal Communications Commission was ordered to review their 5G safety standards. This must occur. The existing heat level standards are arbitrary as electromagnetic radiation can penetrate buildings and bodies. Electromatic radiation has more complex side effects than exposure to heat levels. As the technology is new it must be studied and regulated with concern for our children's health, it is a major concern that it is being pushed forward without adequate safety testing. If our regulatory agencies are going to support the use of 5G technology without proper safety data then it stands to reason that parents and teachers should be the ones to oppose children’s use of 5G until we have more information on the actual safety or lack thereof of such novel technologies. Studies of how media influences children’s mental capacities show that increased screen time for children at age 1 year is associated with developmental delays in communication and problem solving at ages 2-4 years old (Jama Network, 2023). The CDC recently changed their Developmental Milestones for children, which moved the developmental milestones to older ages (Real Clear Education, 2022). There is concern that they lowered the milestones and standards for language and that the change could cause developmental delays to go undetected. Could developmental delays be caused by wifi radiation? This must be examined. The best policy is to address developmental delays early with treatment options and learning interventions. Specialists are concerned that with the new lower CDC standards children that are in the 25 to 45 percentile are no longer in the developmental monitoring range causing them to go unnoticed and limiting the possibility to utilize early interventions (Solis-Moreira, J., 2022). Studies find that there is a correlation between heavy media use and moderate amounts of muscular pain and dysfunction. Length of screen time is related to severity of pain. The research suggests that children who are using computers and electronic games may adopt the types of sustained and awkward postures that are associated with musculoskeletal disorders in working adults. It also suggests that the physical demands of prolonged computer use could lead to adverse effects on child development including visual, neurological, and physical changes (NIH, 2002). Studies on the detrimental effects of media use on children’s eyes report that increased time on the computer causes children to develop myopia, which is nearsightedness. The studies reported that high levels of cell phone use is associated with about a 30% higher risk of myopia and when combined with prolonged computer use raised the risk factor of developing myopia to 80% in children (Science Daily, 2021). The infostructure that the cell towers support are causing mental, emotional, and physical harm to our children. This is an openly discussed fact amongst concerned teachers. We see the effects of this technology harming our students daily. We must test this technology against actual human health outcomes not overlays of unrelated data points of heat and human tolerance to heat levels.

Submission to Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397: Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields, Radiofrequency Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure Submitted by: Dr Nicole Bijlsma, PhD, Environmental-Health Educator and Researcher, Melbourne, Australia I am writing as a researcher, educator and practitioner who has spent the past 25 years assessing homes for environmental-health hazards. I have also been personally affected by EMF exposure. I developed persistent sleep problems within 2 weeks of moving into our first home. I eventually realised (after 7 years and ten miscarriages - no explanation was provided by the medical industry and we didnt qualify for IVF), we were sleeping adjacent to the meter panel. I purchased a triple axis digital gauss meter and found elevated AC magnetic fields on the bed during the early hours of the morning (when the hot water system was in use). We consequently relocated to another bedroom - sleep improved and I successfully carried a twin pregnancy to term. The fix was simple and cost nothing. I subsequently established the Australian College of Environmental Studies in 1999, and have spent the past 25 years teaching students how to undertake home assessments for mould, electromagnetic fields, allergens and toxicants. Poor sleep is one of the most common complaints I see where EMF exposure is a factor. The two sources I find most often are: radiofrequency radiation from Wi-Fi routers and wireless-enabled devices kept in or near bedrooms, often running all night; and AC magnetic fields from meter panels, switchboards and wiring, including where smart meters are installed on the other side of a bedroom wall. Reducing exposure in the bedroom is frequently followed by reports of better sleep. Typical steps are moving the bed, switching off Wi-Fi at night and using wired connections. I subsequently undertook a PhD in environmental medicine (RMIT) examining the impact of environmental exposures to toxicants and manmade electromagnetic fields, gaps in current exposure standards, and the associated health effects. My dissertation, which asks whether radiofrequency radiation affects sleep, is attached in support of this submission. This involved the first real-world study (double blind, randomised, placebo controlled pilot study) on the impact of a Wi-Fi enabled device on sleep in healthy adults using a baby monitor which was statistically significant (within 7 days). Current exposure standards are designed to prevent short-term heating and nerve stimulation which do not reflect real-world exposure. They do not adequately address chronic, low-level, night-time exposure in the home, which is when the body should be resting and repairing. Nor do they account for vulnerable groups such as children, or those impacted by mould who frequently become sensitive to manmade electromagnetic fields and toxicants. Recommendations Remarkably, the most effective measures are simple and cheap: Design-stage solutions. Building codes and planning guidance should require meter panels, switchboards and smart meters to be located away from bedrooms and living areas. They should also encourage hard-wired data connections in new homes. These measures cost almost nothing when planned in at the design stage, but are expensive to retrofit. Mass consumer education. The public needs clear, independent and practical guidance on reducing exposure, particularly while sleeping. This includes turning off Wi-Fi at night, keeping devices out of bedrooms and checking what is behind the bedhead. A precautionary approach. Exposures should be kept as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), and research and surveillance on sleep and other non-thermal effects should be funded. These recommendations are consistent with the Australian Senate Inquiry into Electromagnetic Radiation (2001) (attached). The Chair's report called for a rigorous precautionary approach to wireless technology, for emissions to be kept as low as reasonably achievable, and for clear, independent public information so people can make informed choices. Twenty-five years on, those recommendations are more relevant than ever. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute.

I am submitting this comment as an individual, based on my own recent experience. In the last two years I have developed what feels like a new sensitivity to certain wireless equipment. I had not had this problem with similar devices before. After I upgraded my home network to Wi-Fi 6 and plugged in the new router, I immediately developed a severe headache and nausea. Both stopped when I unplugged the router. I now keep it in a separate room. If I spend more than a few minutes in that room, the headache and nausea return. I have also had similar headaches, with a burning sensation, on recent flights. I believe this may be related to in-flight Wi-Fi. I now avoid Bluetooth headphones and generally keep my distance from this kind of equipment. I am not claiming this proves a specific medical mechanism. I am reporting a consistent pattern in my own life and urging HHS to support research into whether some people have become more sensitive to RF/EMF, including newer Wi-Fi generations and dense wireless environments (homes, aircraft). Distinguishing established evidence from emerging findings and uncertainty would help families and policymakers. Thank you for considering public input.

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 a licensed Naturopathic Medical Doctor, Medical Director and Owner of Regenerate Health Medical Center in Santa Barbara, California. Environmental medicine is an important part of my clinical work, and I have worked with patients who report symptoms affected or exacerbated by EMF and wireless radiation exposure. This issue is also deeply personal to me. I am very sensitive to EMF and RF exposure. My concern developed through my own experience, my clinical work with patients, and years of continuing education and investigation into environmental exposures and their effects on human health. My reactions can be immediate. When I am around high levels of RF exposure (measured in microwatts per square meter), including from cell towers, Wi-Fi, or prolonged cell phone use, I develop headaches. With longer exposure, I can experience dizziness and nausea. These experiences have substantially changed how I live. I rarely leave my cell phone connected during the day. I turn it on when I need to check messages or use it for a specific purpose, then return it to airplane mode. My family and I have also gone to considerable lengths to reduce exposure in our home. We use hardwired Ethernet rather than Wi-Fi and avoid Bluetooth and wireless devices. We use dirty electricity filters and an EMF kill switch so we do not sleep in an electrical field. Our solar panels were intentionally placed only over non-sleeping areas. We also use graphite-based shielding paint and EMF-blocking window film. These choices require time, expense and planning. We make them because I can personally tell the difference. That experience also affects how I practice medicine. At Regenerate Health Medical Center, we take environmental exposures seriously when evaluating persistent or unexplained symptoms. We consider the environment in which a patient lives, sleeps, works and attempts to heal. I have encountered patients who report symptoms associated with EMF exposure or worsening of existing symptoms in higher-exposure environments. Their experiences deserve serious investigation rather than automatic dismissal. My perspective is therefore both personal and clinical. I know what it is like to experience these symptoms myself, and I also know what it is like to sit across from patients describing similar concerns. When patients repeatedly report changes in symptoms associated with their environment, physicians should be encouraged to investigate those patterns, not taught to disregard them simply because our understanding of the exposure is incomplete. I am particularly concerned by how difficult these exposures are to control. People can filter their water, remediate mold or stop using a particular chemical. Wireless radiation can come from neighboring Wi-Fi, cellular infrastructure, smart meters, schools, workplaces and public spaces. Even inside your own home, substantially reducing exposure requires actively working against how modern technology is designed. HHS should take a serious and independent look at this issue. People reporting sensitivity to wireless radiation should be documented and studied. Clinicians observing patterns among environmentally sensitive patients should be heard. Research should examine potential biological effects beyond tissue heating and investigate chronic, cumulative, real-world exposure from multiple sources. I also urge HHS to investigate potentially susceptible populations, including children and people reporting electromagnetic hypersensitivity, and study whether reducing exposure is associated with measurable changes in symptoms, sleep, autonomic function and relevant biological markers. As a physician, I want better answers for my patients. As someone who personally experiences symptoms with higher EMF exposure, I want those experiences taken seriously and investigated. And as someone whose family has gone to considerable lengths to create a lower-EMF home, I want Americans to retain the ability to make meaningful choices about their exposure. HHS has an opportunity to examine this question through the lens where it belongs: human health. Please listen to patients, families, clinicians and researchers raising these concerns. Fund rigorous research reflecting modern exposure conditions, investigate those who report particular sensitivity, and give Americans better information and greater ability to make informed decisions about their exposure. Thank you for giving those of us who have experienced this issue personally and clinically an opportunity to be heard.

I am submitting this comment in response to ET Docket No. 13‑84. I am writing to share my personal history with electromagnetic sensitivity and the profound impact radiofrequency (RF) exposure has had on my health, daily functioning, and ability to participate in normal life. I have always loved technology. For many years, my office was equipped with multiple wireless devices: DECT cordless phones, a wireless headset, a Wi‑Fi router on my desk, a cell phone with an ear device, and other equipment that produced continuous radiofrequency emissions. Prior to that, I worked for several years on the 18th floor of a building while employed by the District Attorney’s Office, where microwave dishes were mounted directly above my workspace. I cannot say whether that contributed to the onset of my condition, but it was part of my long-term exposure history. Over time, I became increasingly ill and did not understand why. I developed severe fatigue, pain, and debilitating symptoms that left me bedridden for nearly two years. Physicians told me it was fibromyalgia or chronic fatigue syndrome, but none of the treatments helped, and no one could explain the cause. I also developed persistent tinnitus, which I still live with today. Eventually, after extensive searching and consultation, I learned about electromagnetic sensitivity. A building biologist evaluated my home and found significant wireless radiation from my router, DECT phones, and high levels of dirty electricity surrounding my workspace and bedroom. Once these sources were removed or mitigated, my symptoms improved enough for me to function again. Today, my home is fully hardwired. I use Ethernet instead of Wi‑Fi, I have installed a kill switch to turn off electricity around my bedroom at night, and I am extremely careful with my cell phone use. Even with these precautions, I remain highly sensitive to radiofrequency exposure in public places. The ubiquity of wireless devices, cell towers, and Wi‑Fi networks makes it difficult for me to leave my home. I am effectively homebound because of the widespread RF emissions in the community around me. This is not just a personal challenge — it is a public health issue. Wireless infrastructure is proliferating at a pace that far exceeds any precautionary approach. Small cells, 5G and 6G systems, dense Wi‑Fi networks, and satellite‑based RF sources are being deployed without meaningful consideration of long-term, cumulative exposure or the needs of people who are already electrically sensitive. For individuals like me, there is increasingly no place left to go. Public spaces, medical facilities, transportation systems, workplaces, and even residential neighborhoods are saturated with continuous RF emissions. The lack of low‑EMF environments or accommodations effectively excludes people with electromagnetic sensitivity from participating in society. HHS asked specifically for input from individuals experiencing health effects related to RF exposure. My experience demonstrates that electromagnetic sensitivity can be disabling, life‑altering, and functionally limiting. It affects access to healthcare, mobility, employment, and basic daily activities. It also raises serious questions about health equity: people with this condition have no safe public spaces, no recognized accommodations, and no meaningful protection from environmental exposures that are now unavoidable. I respectfully urge HHS to recognize electromagnetic sensitivity as a legitimate health concern, to evaluate the public health implications of chronic RF exposure, and to consider precautionary measures that protect vulnerable populations. People like me deserve acknowledgment, protection, and the ability to participate in society without being harmed by unavoidable RF exposure. Thank you for considering my experience. Respectfully,

I am very sensitive to EMF and very concerned about RF and wireless radiation. When working from home, I experience high anxiety and heart palpitations because my router was located in the same room that I was working in. Lost a day of work to move it to the garage. Now I have to limit my time in the garage. I have gone to great lengths to protect myself from radiation. Wired headphones, faraday enclosures on electronics, just to name a couple items. I live in a suburb with cell towers in close proximity to my residence and then of course there is the smart meter mounted to my home. Enough is Enough. PLEASE protect us from EMFs, RF and Wireless Radiation.

It is not only injurious to us to be always surrounded by Wi-Fi and radiation, but please think about your children and grandchildren. It is not practical for us to be living in our own personal faraday cage because we have become so sensitive that we cannot function in our wired society.

I have learned that in order to sleep I need to turn off the Wifi at night. This means that when we travel I cannot stay in a hotel. I must choose a rental that will allow me to turn off the Wifi. I have tested this many times, which means many sleepless nights! Please take this issue seriously and study the true health and environmental effects of EMFs, RF, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. It is ridiculous to assume that these huge changes to our environment do not affect us, our children, and the animal kingdom in profound ways. This issue screams for rigorous scientific study!

I have been attacked more ways than I can count. Phones , WiFi, Planes, drones, satellite, etc. I have also watched my family be attacked for me trying to tell the truth. All the attachments are what led to my attack. Basically I found Microsoft stealing my work and kicked them out by replacing my network and OS. When I did that I found a bunch of hidden WiFi signals in my house through a WiFi analyzer. When I actually found the technology I couldn't believe what I had found and actually spent more than a year trying to understand what it was. This is not just theft of my work which I could care less in the bigger picture this is infiltration of humanity through a technology many don't understand. I have learned more than I ever wanted to know about all this but to not speak up after watching how it's been used on our country and the world would be a crime in its self. All pictures are of self assembly technology. The last attached one is on my network rack right as I was about to transfer data. It is an antenna still assembling, you can tell by the motion in the photo. Notice it's symmetry at the top. This is an antenna trying to pull data from my server below. Where do we stand if a person gets attacked for finding out Microsoft is stealing their work.

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. My family has had an EMF expert come to our home because we were concerned with the proximity of a cell phone tower. The EMF expert used appropriate tools and showed us the results. The levels of EMF were shockingly high. We mitigated everything that was in our control. (WiFi,Bluetooth, any rouge wiring in our home.) Unfortunately the levels were still way to high for our 3 very small children who stay at home with mom. We had ZERO control over the cell phone tower placed just 200m from our home. We ended up making a hard financial choice and moving from that home. We just didn't want the results to show in X amount of years that our children were harmed due to the exposure and proximity of that cell phone tower. A new family moved into that home and I worry for those children. I worry for all the children who's parents are not aware of the dangers. It needs to be researched. Publish the harms/dangers once and for all. We need to keep the next generation safe as best as we can. 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.