{"id":"26110083181","number":"26110083181","name":"Beth Osborn","source_name":"Beth Osborn","organization":"","posted":"2026-10-22","received":"2026-10-21","body":"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 & 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. 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 am writing to express my deep concern about the potential health effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation from cell towers and to ask that the FCC take a more serious, proactive role in investigating the experiences of individuals and families who believe their health has been affected by exposure to these emissions. In 2007, a cell tower was erected near our home. Following its installation, my daughter began experiencing a series of serious and debilitating health problems that dramatically altered the course of her life. The timing of these symptoms and the profound impact they have had on her life have left our family deeply concerned about the possible relationship between her health and her exposure to RF radiation. Her symptoms were so severe that her school attendance became extremely poor, and she was on the verge of being forced into homeschooling. As parents, we were desperate to understand what was happening to our daughter and to find answers that would allow her to live a normal, healthy life. We pursued extensive medical care, including multiple appointments with specialists in cardiology, neurology, and other practitioners, including neurological chiropractors. We even spent ten days at the Carrick Brain Center trying to determine the cause of her debilitating symptoms. Among other problems, she experienced stabbing abdominal pains, chronic migraines, and numbness in her arm when she used a cell phone. These were not minor inconveniences; they interfered with her ability to attend school, participate in everyday activities, and enjoy the quality of life every young person deserves. She was eventually diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder, electrosensitivity, and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS). Despite years of effort to understand and manage her conditions, the consequences have been devastating. My daughter is now 34 years old and remains unable to work outside the home. Our family has gone to extraordinary lengths to investigate and reduce potential environmental exposures in our home. We have had the house thoroughly checked for electrical wiring problems. She sleeps in a specially tented bed surrounded by silver-lined material intended to block wireless signals. We have eliminated Wi-Fi from our home and turn off the electrical power to the rooms surrounding her bedroom every night. These are not steps a family takes lightly. They reflect years of concern, searching for answers, and trying to give our daughter the best possible chance of improving her health. I recognize that the timing of an exposure and the onset of symptoms do not, by themselves, establish medical causation. However, the fact that her symptoms began after the cell tower was erected, followed by years of serious illness and disability, raises questions that deserve careful, independent scientific investigation rather than dismissal. Meanwhile, more cell towers and wireless infrastructure continue to be added to our surrounding area. For families who are concerned about RF exposure, it increasingly feels as though there is nowhere to go to escape it. We need reliable research, transparent information, and meaningful consideration of the people who report serious health problems and whose lives have been profoundly affected. I respectfully urge the FCC to: 1. Support and facilitate independent, long-term research into the potential health effects of RF exposure, including the effects of chronic exposure from multiple wireless sources over time. 2. Ensure that research examines a broad range of reported health concerns, including neurological symptoms, migraines, autonomic dysfunction, and other chronic conditions, while using rigorous scientific methods to establish what relationships, if any, exist. 3. Reevaluate existing exposure standards as new evidence emerges, with transparent scientific review and appropriate consideration of uncertainty, vulnerable populations, and cumulative environmental exposure. 4. Improve transparency and public access to information about cell tower locations, emissions, compliance measurements, and the scientific evidence used to establish safety standards. 5. Create a meaningful process for documenting and investigating reported health concerns from individuals and families who believe their symptoms began or worsened following the installation of nearby wireless infrastructure. 6. Consider precautionary measures and appropriate policy changes if credible evidence identifies risks that current standards do not adequately address. My family has spent years trying to understand why our daughter became so ill and why, at 34, she still cannot work outside the home. We cannot go back and change what happened, but we can ask that our experience contribute to a more thorough examination of a public health question that deserves attention. This is not simply an argument about technology. It is about people, families, and the responsibility to investigate legitimate concerns with openness, scientific rigor, and compassion. Wireless technology continues to expand rapidly, and the public deserves confidence that its safety standards are based on the best available evidence and are revisited when warranted. I ask the FCC to take these concerns seriously, to encourage independent research, and to consider what changes may be necessary to better protect public health. Families should not have to spend decades searching for answers while watching a loved one struggle with chronic illness and disability. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I hope the FCC will give serious consideration to the experiences of families like ours and take meaningful steps toward obtaining the answers that are still needed. Sincerely, Beth Osborn Carmel, IN 46032","attachments":[],"attachment_names":[],"attachment_inventory":true,"withheld":false,"source":"https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/26110083181","filing_type":"COMMENT","proceedings":"ET 13-84","capture_reviewed":false,"captured_at":"2026-10-22T18:01:19.009Z","supplied_classification":null,"tags":["school-connectivity","health-experiences","sleep-neurology","cancer","children-schools","disability-access","towers-antennas","wifi-devices","wildlife-environment","standards-testing","remand-accountability","research-requests"],"source_hash":"8e9d301f1e6c029bb60abd035759b9265c6e9e26d93e5bf55752ecbc8ce0ce79","slug":"school-connectivity-filing-26110083181","classification":{"id":"26110083181","body_sha256":"07c23e26dc8d2e2c73edd41d6f5e9ccb375a8a41965956d80d3a4651e7942a33","status":"text_matched","primary_topic":"school-connectivity","topics":[{"id":"school-connectivity","evidence":"As parents, we were desperate to understand what was happening to our daughter and to find answers that would allow her to live a normal, healthy life."},{"id":"health-experiences","evidence":"The timing of these symptoms and the profound impact they have had on her life have left our family deeply concerned about the possible relationship between her health and her exposure to RF radiation."},{"id":"sleep-neurology","evidence":"We pursued extensive medical care, including multiple appointments with specialists in cardiology, neurology, and other practitioners, including neurological chiropractors."},{"id":"cancer","evidence":"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."},{"id":"children-schools","evidence":"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."},{"id":"disability-access","evidence":"My daughter is now 34 years old and remains unable to work outside the home."},{"id":"towers-antennas","evidence":"This issue matters to me personally because: I am writing to express my deep concern about the potential health effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation from cell towers and to ask that the FCC take a more serious, proactive role in investigating the experiences of individuals and families who believe their health has been affected by exposure to these emissions."},{"id":"wifi-devices","evidence":"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."},{"id":"wildlife-environment","evidence":"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."},{"id":"standards-testing","evidence":"Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines."},{"id":"remand-accountability","evidence":"Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines."},{"id":"research-requests","evidence":"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."}],"summary":"","method":"Local topic rules v1; exact supporting passages; not an AI or medical review","scope":"Captured filing text only. Attachment contents not examined."},"forum_topics":["school-connectivity","health-experiences","sleep-neurology","cancer","children-schools","disability-access","towers-antennas","wifi-devices","wildlife-environment","standards-testing","remand-accountability","research-requests"],"primary_topic":"school-connectivity","forum_title":"I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its dec…"}