Exposure limits & testing

I urge the FCC to respond to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The current guidelines do not adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. The impact of RF radiation on both adults and children are serious matters and the FCC and critical federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, should rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because my husband developed a severe reaction to electromagnetic radio frequencies after contracting Lyme Disease. He experiences a very specific type of headache with exposure to wifi routers, cell towers, and all types of electrical devices. We have to shield our computers with nickel shields to reduce his exposure; and we do not have wifi in our house and we use ethernet only. There is an elementary school adjoinnig our property, and these children need protection. Cell towers are being placed on school property, church properties and at parks, all places where children are being harmed. I was a public school nurse in the 1980's and am well-aware of the types of diseases children faced in that era. They were few. Today, children are sicker than ever. They need protection from harmful influences, including radiation. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to personal experiences and evidence and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court. Do not put off this important matter.

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. This issue matters to me because my life, my career and my health has been irreparably harmed by the ubiquitous and insidiously ever increasing RF exposure. I am unable to live a normal life or perform in my career. My family has ostracized and then accepted my situation, although visits are fewer and short due to their dependence on their devices for their being and livelihoods. It breaks my heart to watch them utilize their wireless devices and to realize they have no choice in today’s world and recognizing the difficulty I have experienced by not using them and doing my best to avoid the RF radiation. I have had to become a recluse and cannot even go to a city park as they all have towers, placed there to avoid public scrutiny. Fear of being ostracized goes to a whole new level because the device addiction predicates that people are afraid to know or literally do not want to know deleterious effects of RF radiation. While I was still practicing medicine, I came to recognize that people would rather swallow poisonous chemicals with multiple side effects (otherwise known as pharmaceuticals) or have the AV nodes in their heart atria burned (“ablation therapy”) and undergo chemotherapy rather than recognize the cause of their anxiety, lack of cognition, insomnia, headaches, joint pain, insulin resistance, type II diabetes, high blood pressure, tachycardia, a-fib, cancer, etc., etc. I have researched the subject and written a book, still yet to be published because I was warned it would never be picked up by major publishers as they will not bite the hand that feeds them. Media rarely touches the topic for the same reason. Yet thousands upon thousands of people continue to proliferate their ownership and use of wireless devices while increasing their “pills for the ills”, undergoing procedures and opting in for surgeries, because, you know, “my insurance pays for it”. It is estimated that thirty percent of the population is experiencing symptoms from RF radiation exposure. If an evaluation of the pharmaceuticals used to address symptoms were included in that analysis, then 98% of the population would be shown to have one or more symptoms from the man-made frequencies that the FCC has allowed to proliferate in our environment at an unprecedented rate with no regard for safety. The FCC’s failure to adequately protect humans was seemingly purposeful since it has allowed legislation to pass in 1996 that prohibits communities and people from objecting to towers and antennae placement based on health or environmental influence. The FCC is a captured agency via lobbying and the the revolving door of the wireless industries’ and FCCs board positions and in my not-so-humble opinion, the agency should be dismantled. My ‘opinion’ is also supported by complete disregard of the Court ruling that 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. That’s right - on August 13, 2021, the D.C. Circuit ruled the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination. Specifically, five years ago, 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. In July 2026, the FCC adopted a fourfold increase in power limits for wireless devices, with no public health analysis of what that would do to exposure. It has moved to end environmental safety reviews for cell tower projects. This is unfathomable! The FCC has an immediate obligation to 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. Since the FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health, it must work with the HHS and other health agencies to evaluate the plethora of studies that DO show harm. WE DON’T NEED MORE STUDIES. Other countries have been gracious enough to provide valid studies that prove harm. Yet, the FCC 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 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 have concerns about long-term exposure on humans, animals, and plants. 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.

My name is Laurie Brown. I taught middle school for the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) for approximately 26 years. I rarely was ill and accumulated approximately 800 hours of sick time during my career, the equivalent of nearly 7-8 months of work. I enjoyed a normal, healthy life and never had to concern myself with routers, Wi-Fi or electro-magnetic radiation. Unfortunately, my career, health, and life as I knew it changed in April 2015, when my school “upgraded” our Wi-Fi system and added 190 access points, two in every classroom, and brought in wireless devices, increasing the total wireless radiation on campus. My District did little to protect me from the peaks or spikes of radiation emitted from all the wireless devices on campus. Our system was activated in April 2015. After a few hours on campus, I would begin to feel ill and experience symptoms such as headaches, heart palpitations, skin burning, earaches, nausea, foggy headedness, inability to concentrate, and many other debilitating symptoms – all symptoms of microwave sickness. I was becoming electro sensitive and was diagnosed with Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome caused by exposure to RF radiation. After a few consecutive days of work and increased exposure on campus, I started using my illness days. Some other staff members experienced physical and debilitating symptoms from the increased radiofrequencies on campus, too. My Principal contacted LAUSD’s Office of Environmental Health and Safety (OEHS) and wrote to the Inspector General of LAUSD sharing his concern as well as staff members’ concerns. The District’s OEHS waited approximately 6 weeks, until Common Core Testing was over, when fewer students would be operating devices and on campus with cell phones, to measure the RF frequencies in specific classrooms. On June 22, 2015, during the summer break, my principal wrote to LAUSD's Inspector General stating, "After the system was turned on, several employees complained of illness (headaches, light headedness, etc.).” After the installation of the new commercial Wi-Fi system at my school and becoming ill from my exposure to EMF/EMR, I learned LAUSD had been warned by doctors and scientists, prior to installation, that the commercial grade Wi-Fi being considered was untested and potentially dangerous in school environments. Cindy Sage, an EMF expert and environmental scientist, critiqued URS Corporation’s (the designer and installer of the new Wi-Fi system), evaluation and could not support URS’ conclusions regarding the safety of LAUSD’s proposed Wi-Fi system. In February 2017, Sage wrote the following to LAUSD: “Children who attend LAUSD schools are being placed into classroom environments with pervasive exposures from wireless routers and devices, and for some of them, is likely to result in permanent electro hypersensitivity characterized by chronic health and cognitive impairments. The same is already true for some teachers who have sought accommodations due to their acquired hypersensitivity to wireless exposures.” The Executive Committee of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine wrote to LAUSD and stated, “it is unlikely that there are currently enough doctors in Los Angeles County familiar with the biological effects of microwave radiation to diagnose and treat the numbers of children who will potentially become symptomatic from exposure to your wireless system should you elect to install it. Statistics show that you can expect an immediate reaction in 3% of your students and time‐delayed reactions in 30% of them. This will also include teachers.” In my opinion, by using averages compared to “raw” data, the RF peaks/spikes to which students and staff are exposed each day, every day, over the course of an entire school day or school year (cumulative effects of spikes and exposure), are mitigated and diluted on paper, likely creating, and providing a false sense of safety to the public, parents, staff and students. Clearly, spikes, density, and time (duration) of exposure are important and should matter to those responsible for protecting the public and assuring safety measures. Here is an example of LAUSD’s RF protocol and evaluation: “For the purpose of the evaluation, The AVE data set was evaluated and compared to the LAUSD adopted criterion. A combination of the magnitude and the duration of the energy bursts are integrated by the SRM-3006 to provide the AVE power density results which are averaged for each frequency. The AVE power density is lower than the Maximum power density results. The average of the AVE (AVE-average) of each measurement is used for comparison to the adopted criterion.” In other words, averaging the spikes and peaks does not truly reflect real life exposure! The current FCC guidelines are outdated and only thermal based. The FCC and Department of Health and Human Services should not continue to ignore the overwhelming abundance of scientific studies proving biological harm caused by pulsed EMR/EMF/RF, nor should they allow RF spikes to be averaged and diluted over time. Medications are prescribed with specific instructions to minimize side effects and overdosing. The same safety precautions and concerns apply to overdosing on wireless radiation. More is not better and controls and guidelines are necessary. The FCC and Department of Health and Human Services must address this immediate public health crisis. Protocols and protective measures must be developed and applied in real time, before it is too late. Today, I no longer teach, something that was not only a career, but a great passion in my life. I loved teaching, found it stimulating, rewarding, and incredibly fulfilling. Because I enjoyed it so much, I intended to work for a lot longer, until a ripe old age, but I found it difficult to return to work without being reasonably accommodated. Unfortunately, I am unable to fill all my free time with meaningful activities and work due to the proliferation and installation of wireless antennas and devices everywhere. My husband and I removed our Wi-Fi and cordless phones, turned off our wireless emitting devices, and use hardwired connections. I have a cell phone, but do not keep it on and my husband mostly keeps his off around me. I know longer have the same freedom or luxury to enjoy limitless time out, travel, staying in a hotel, visiting family, and grocery shopping as I once did without feeling lousy. Living with Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome caused by EMFs (microwave sickness) is challenging and limiting. My quality of life has been severely reduced and none of it occurred by my choice: it was the direct result of the FCC’s, Department of Health and Human Services’, and FDA’s failures and disregard of biological harm caused by pulsed wireless radiation. My health, lifestyle, quality of life, and freedom to come and go as I please have been drastically and negatively affected. In addition, my income and retirement have been significantly reduced. I am very fortunate to have a supportive and loving husband and family. Still, though, my condition and losses have impacted us. Federal guidelines, limits, and protocols are needed to monitor and ensure the public’s safety from exposure to wireless radiation in real time, without averaging the spikes and peaks! No longer can we ignore biological effects caused by pulsed, wireless radiation. Although it may be an inconvenient truth, more is dangerous and is biologically disruptive; we are electrical beings. Too many people are already sick and more people will become seriously ill if we stand by and do nothing to address our chronic and limitless exposure to wireless radiation. I do not want others to suffer the same fate as me. /s/Laurie Brown Laurie Brown 4221 Noble Ave Sherman Oaks, CA 91403

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 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. 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. I personally moved out to where there were no Cell Towers to get away from harmful EMFs and to where the environment is natural and raw. 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. Thank You.

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: As a marketing communications professional, I must use devices daily for my work...especially my cellular phone. I sometimes feel sick after using for too many hours. I am also very concerned about my university age daughter using wireless headphones. We know these are linked to brain damage and they should be banned. She often has headaches. 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.

The 1996 radiofrequency limits are long outdated, and with more and more impact studies that have been done in the past three decades proving, not suggesting, biological harm, there needs to be much tighter regulation regarding the communications industry and the increasing “electro-smog” problem and the detrimental effects of short-term and long-term exposure to these fields. We used to be able to place the responsibility (though still unfairly) on the end consumer to know the risks of the technology they partake in, but no longer are people exposed to one or two electromagnetic fields at a time – we are now entering a time where people are often exposed to ten, twenty, even more fields at a given time, and often don't escape that exposure throughout the entire day. Given the breakneck speed of technological innovation and adoption in the past three decades, and those technologies should be held to a stricter standard in order to protect the health of the people who use them. Not everyone feels WiFi or cell tower radiofrequencies, though more and more do - and others, it has a destructive impact on their lives. We have friends who have kids with brain tumors from being near cell phone towers, and we have known so-called “antenna refugees,” hypersensitive to the frequency radiation. My partner, who is hypersensitive to EMF, had to move when there was a cell tower constructed nearby and saw significant health decline at that time, fourteen years ago. We bought a property in Washington State and we paid the utility company to remove the smart meter because she couldn't sleep. We had the neighbors reduce their WiFi signal because it gave us both headaches, and now AT&T wants to install a cell tower in our neighborhood which, if they do, will force us to sell our property and move again and find a new place free of signal which, in an increasingly electrified civilization and culture, is becoming more and more difficult to find. We need much stricter regulations regarding exposure limits for the general public, especially children, women and hypersensitive people. We need a broad action plan for keeping certain areas (“white-zones”) completely pure and clean of any EMF/electrosmog, where these people can go (without going into a fight-or-flight response or nervous system going haywire), and for minimizing exposure in residential areas. We need to stop blinding ourselves about the side effects of technology for the sake of the GDP and to reconsider the health of the people. We need change.

My family has been negatively impacted by EMF radiation pollution! My ear burns if I can't use speaker on a cell phone call. My hand gets numb and cold and aches using a wireless mouse. Living close to a cell phone tower and 24 hour wifi has impacted my sleep making me less rested, achy and stiff. All these symptoms go away when camping or traveling away from wifi devices and towers! Another member of my family had to move away from San Francisco where he lived and worked during early implementation of 5G. His feet burned and muscles ached and felt like he had the flu when working at his business. Later he came to learn that 5G had been installed and testing. EMF meters are readily available to the public from a variety of reputable EMF and RF specialists. At times my meter read electromagnetic frequency levels at 10,000 to 100,000 times recommended levels in various areas of my town!!! FCC recommended levels, no less!! It is time for the FCC to start acting on its responsibility to the public!! Research and test over time how, why and how much EACH kind of EMF and RF and dirty electricity energies affect humans, children and adults, birds, mammals and insects!! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to postulate the damages done to bees or children by increased radiation! Just saying "increased radiation" makes a person think it should be tested! Common on and represent the people of our country, our children, YOUR children and grandchildren! Do honest, unbiased research with transparent testing so ALL will know the truth! Thank you!

In 2017, I was acutely injured by a Smart meter that was attached to my home without my consent. One day I was a perfectly normal health person, and the next I had all these strange and serious symptoms like headaches, dizziness, heart palpitations, inability to sleep, increased gut and joint pain, terrible tinnitus, and overwhelming anxiety for no reason at all. These symptoms subsided when I was able to opt-out and get the Smart meter removed from my home but never fully went away and I deal with most of these (tinnitus, dizziness, poor sleep, increased gut and joint pain, and poor sleep) every day and they increased even more when the 5G came to my neighborhood and surrounding cell towers during Covid. I have 185 cell towers and antennas within a 3 mile radius of my home and surrounded on all sides in my neighborhood by close range 4G/5G cell towers 1/3 mile away from my home. Even though I had my Smart meter removed, the Smart meters on all my neighbor's home on 1/4 acre lots are all affecting me in addition to the EMFs coming from the high voltage power lines running right through the center of my village. Even though I am hardwired through my cable line and ethernet cords in my house, I am being exposed to all the wireless radiation coming from my neighbor's WiFi routers. You see because of the ubiquitous nature of wireless radiation today, I am being forced to live in a toxic soup of microwave radiation 24/7 that is causing oxidative stress to every cell of my body and causing all kinds of health effects that destroy my quality of life, increase my risk of cancer, and reduce my life expectancy. These are all involuntary exposures with NO informed consent to me or my family members who are also being adversely affected. In addition, every time I go into public places like my schools, my church, retail stores, the mall, my local coffee shop, etc. I am being blasted by both public WiFi and cell phone radiation coming from all the people scrolling and searching their cell phones all around me. It's very hard for me to even stand in line at the store these days with people on either side of me and how powerful the newest cell phones are. I am urging you to please consider the ubiquitous nature of all of these sources of wireless radiation (cell towers, Smart meters, cell phones, WiFi routers, Smart TVs and appliances, watches and Smart devices, electric vehicles, etc.) and how they are exposing us to a toxic soup of microwave radiation 24/7 that we can't escape anymore. Please use my personal experience and the thousands more you will receive along with the 10,000 pages of scientific studies of evidence of biological harm to humans and the environment to update the FCC's RF radiation exposure limits. This is the biggest environmental toxin we are facing in America right now and contributes to all of the chronic diseases that are destroying our children and bankrupting our nation (obesity, diabetes, dementia and Alzheimers, Autism, Autoimmune disease, Cancer). This is a national security threat and must be halted until new, real safety controls and updated human and environmental exposure limits are enacted and put in place. Thank you for urgent attention and action on this long overdue threat to America.

It is critical to have strong regulations regarding exposure to wireless radiation. Individuals and families may share experiences involving potential adverse health effects they believe may be associated with RF/EMF exposure. It is also important to receive observations from healthcare professionals, researchers, and public health practitioners that may help identify patterns warranting further study. Information about whether scientific, technical, or regulatory changes could improve the assessment, disclosure, or regulation of wireless radiation exposure. We need to assess Information about methods for measuring individual and population-level exposure, potential improvements for assessing real-world exposure, information that should be disclosed to the public, and existing or potential surveillance systems. There needs to be data about why RF exposure assessment or risk evaluation should differ for populations including children, pregnant women, older adults, people with implanted medical devices, workers with elevated occupational exposure, and people with preexisting medical conditions. We need to look at evidence concerning potential adverse health effects associated with RF radiation exposure, including exposure below current federal limits. We also need there to be information about cumulative exposure patterns associated with existing and emerging wireless technologies and potential environmental effects. Research priorities should be decided by researchers and the public to identify the highest priority gaps in RF/EMF and public health research and recommend ways federal health agencies can better coordinate research, including through the Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.