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 is just one study I believe the FCC should review when addressing the concerns about wireless radiation: McCredden, McLean, and Steinenmann (2026): Wireless sensitivities and comorbidities: A prevalence study of co-morbidities in Canada, Australia, and the United States Although this study does not establish causation, I believe the information gathered raises enough red flags to warrant further investigation of both the thermal and non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields. These studies are crucial for studying its impact on both the human population and the environment. 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. I have always been sensitive to electromagnetic frequencies. I first noticed it as a child when we would drive under high power electrical wires. I would feel “pressure” or pain in my head and chest. Decades later, as cell towers started to be constructed, I noticed increased intensity and headaches when within a certain range of cell towers. In 2012, while vacationing at a resort that was in close proximity to a cell tower, I ended up in the emergency room with chest pain. They found trace levels of troponin in my blood and a cardiac catheritization was performed. I was 44 years old and otherwise healthy. Around the same time, I started to have symptoms when near Wi-Fi and security systems, while holding a cell phone next to my head, when wearing wireless headphones, and when using Bluetooth in my car. Now, with 5G expansion, satellite technology, and increased security systems, my symptoms have increased tremendously and are often unbearable. There is frequent ringing in my ears, headaches, chest pressure, shortness of breath, and extreme fatigue. I find that it is especially bad on overcast days. 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. People should always come before profits!