All comment threads

I have been negatively impacted by artifical EMF's for the last decade. I can feel the impact on my body as it causes migraines, tinnutis, sensitivity to sounds, smells and vision. I also become extremely dizzy and cannot form clear thoughts. I am unable to sleep or function when surrounding by them. During COVID the power company installed a smart meter on my house without any notice. Therefore I couldn't opt out before it was installed. The 30 days it was on my home was the sickest I had ever been. I couldn't get out of bed and I couldn't form coheisive sentences or thoughts. I had a debilitating migraine for those 30 days. I had to send an official letter from an attorney to have it removed and a digital meter put on instead. There was no way for me to receive my analog, non-transmitting meter back. There is sufficient evidence of the dangers of artifical EMF however profit seems to be put over health of humans time and time again. I vehemently oppose any smart technology and the increased use of EMF we are exposed to that we cannot opt out of.

I have a friend who is allergic to fluorescent lights. This has severely limited the kinds of work she can do: she has worked outside, even in winter, for many years. I myself am allergic to smart phones. They make me feel wired, vibrating in a hyper, weird way. I got rid of my smart phone and use my stupid phone just for emergencies. Fortunately I have control over my emf exposure. What about those who don't?

The FCC was under a court order with EHT v. FCC (Environmental Health Trust v. Federal Communications Commission) to review pulsed microwave emission standards BACK IN 2021! It is 5 years later and the FCC has still not done nothing to address that court order. Are we a nation of laws or are we not? This type of breakdown of the Constitutional framework does NOTHING to instill confidence in government and its agencies. It leads to distrust and suspicions of agency capture by the very industries the FCC is supposed to be regulating. IT IS TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING Remember that YOU and YOUR FAMILIES are also affected by the pulsed microwave radiation soup we are all swimming in. I look forward to this court order being addressed with INTEGRITY.

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. 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 was diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer at the age of 41 and given 3 months to live by my doctors. My husband and I had 4 year old twin daughters at the time. We were devastated. We had an environmental assessment done at our home and discovered that the wireless phone base station we had placed next to my desk to the right of my computer screen was putting off radiation that was off the charts. And my tumor was one my right side just a foot or two from the base station. Before cancer, we were unaware of the harms of RF radiation. We assumed as most people do that our government would not allow devices that caused serious harms. Fortunately I survived my cancer that would otherwise have devastated my children and husband. It’s imperative that the FCC take extreme care in allowing 5G and other devices to be placed near people’s homes and properly test devices we all use to make sure they do not cause cancer and other serious harms. 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 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. 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 concerned about myself and my living environment. I need for you to currently test for all impacts to humans, animals, and our environments. Health impacts need to be heard when licenses/applications are being reviewed in public hearings. "We the people" need an agency set up to protect the people, such as the FCC, to gather the objective scientific data for the health agencies to know the impacts to and protect the people's safety and health. Objective, repeatable data not influenced by corporate financial gain. 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.

This filing was submitted as an attachment. Open the document below to read the comment.

The FCC has been directed to explain its guidelines to protect humans from harm including crucial forms of life that support humans including food sources. , this concerning lackadaisical rules and guidelines concerning RF, EMF, cell tower placement, wifi pollution and the inability for the population to have input over the abuse of Tech to over ride any possible restrictions/studies. . The FCC should not have sole... they are not in the medical field. Only health experts who work with sick people. Since 1996 I have chronic pain, palpitations, double vision, insomnia unexplained but notably around computer/phone/near 3-5G

This email is a reply to 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. It’s shameful that the FCC is not fully considering 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. The FCC must recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because ever since the summer of 2020, when 5G became ubiquitous without any testing or even discussion of its health impacts, I suddenly had EMF intolerance and tinnitus. Neither of these conditions normally appear suddenly, but huge numbers of people had the same experience that I did in 2020. The FCC’s job, among other things, is to protect people from harmful radiation. It is currently failing at this important duty. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence before it. To do less than this is to continue in its complete dereliction of duty.

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. 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. 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 am a 73 year old male. Over the last few years I have developed a very real and very inconvenient sensitivity in my hands to any electromagnetic field generated by wireless devices. I now have to wear EMF protection gloves when I use my phone, tablet, TV/Roku wireless remotes or anything that is wireless and depends on WiFi or data modems or towers for signal transmission. My hands burn when I do not use my gloves, even when I use wireless devices for a few seconds! I've had to change all of my wireless computer accessories and return to wired/corded connections. All of this began happening during the 4G days. I have read many accounts similar to mine, and many that are worse than mine. Since I am adversely affected by the simple devices I named, what else is happening because of larger and more powerful structures, such as towers? I urge you to stop moving forward with technologies that immediately harm EMF/Radiation sensitive people like me and place everyone else, including yourselves, in a kind of living test laboratory. Auto-immune diseases and cancer rates are soaring, especially among young adults and children who are defenseless to speak up for themselves. Pursuing money and power over the health of Americans is unethical!