I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its dec…

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 are just two studies I believe the FCC should review when addressing the concerns about wireless radiation: • McCredden, McLean & Steinemann (2026): Wireless sensitivity and co-morbidities: A prevalence study in Australia, Canada, and the United States – Examined the prevalence of self-reported wireless sensitivity and co-occurring health conditions in the United States, Canada, and Australia, without establishing causation. • BioInitiative Report (2012, with Subsequent Research Updates): Updated Research Summaries – Collection of scientific research concerning neurological effects, oxidative stress, DNA damage, genetic effects, and electromagnetic sensitivity. Individual summaries have different update dates, including 2022. 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 would like to take a different approach to hopefully helping you understand the incredible effects that RF/EMF have on basic day to day life decisions of those of us that are aware of the devastating health effects of the lack of care our government FCC agency is imposing on its citizens. 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. These comments explain what I have to go through to live in the environment of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I do everything I can to protect myself and my family from EMF radiation: We moved to the country on acreage so that I have no neighbors close which reduces our exposure. I refused the Smart Reader (which fortunately Oregon allows) and now have to pay an additional $3 per month as meter reading fee even though they do not read the meter monthly. They only read the meter once a year. My router does not have a separate WiFi on/off switch and Century Link says they do not have a router with this feature that is compatible with this capability. Therefore, I turn off my router and only turn it on when I access the internet which I do only on a hardwired laptop. I do not have a Smart TV so that it is not adding to my exposure. I watch tv with an antenna and record programs with the software on my Hauppauge tuner that is in the desktop computer attached to my TV screen. All hardwired. However, when my tv monitor goes out I understand that there are no TV’s without WiFi available anymore. I do not have any appliances with WiFi capabilities but I understand that it is becoming increasingly difficult to find any appliance without WiFi which will become a problem in the future. I do not have space for a printer near my computer so I have to use WiFi. I keep that printer turned off so that it is not searching for a WiFi signal except when I need to print something. On my cell phone I keep Bluetooth, WiFi, Data and Location off at all times. Every couple days, I try to remember to turn on WiFi for a few minutes in order to receive any text messages that were sent to me by RCS. I keep my cell phone in a far corner in my house and when I am outside, I keep it away from my body. I use a stylus to text. I use Airplane mode, Farraday bag, turning my phone off as other methods to reduce EMF. I have an in-ground landline phone line to my house, and I have corded phones. I installed LED lights in my kitchen and dining area before I knew that they were not good for our health. Now, due to federal regulations I am not able to purchase new cans and incandescent bulbs. That needs to be reversed. My car is a 2008 and therefore does not have the invasive electronic features. I have not purchased a new car because, I understand that any car from 2012 to date has all the invasive electronic features. I do not know what I am going to do if my car fails and I have to replace it. Going inside any hospital or clinic is very unhealthy as you are barraged with EMF. If I require medical assistance it will need to be outside of the medical system. I am forced to pay for Medicare even though I choose not to, and cannot, use its services. I am researching to find out how I can opt out of Medicare so that I can use that money to support my health outside of the HealthCare system such as Home Care, Telehealth, etc. As you can see, this is A LOT. I am blessed to now be retired and have the money to be able to make these modifications in order to feel healthy and vibrant and protect my health. But the question is, should we be creating a world where this is necessary? 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 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. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.