Towers, antennas & siting

I know when the cell towers went to 5 G, the children and families in the area of the tower all got sick. This was like having the flu, body aches, headaches. When the cell tower went in the farmers in the area had cows abort their calves and then you also had the uterine prolapse, which takes a cow out of production. Cornell did a study, never saw the results. It time to end the addition of towers, and upping the level.

Since the installation of 5G in y area I am tired so much of the time. My son who lives with me has to take a long nap during the day too. The before and after effect has been abrupt, not gradual. I try to keep as many wireless devices out of my home as possible, and even pay $10 a month extra to have an analog electrical meter. It amazes me how the government could make an experiment of this magnitude without being entirely sure of the health effects on every living creature on this planet.

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 live in a condominium complex and my building has five attached units. Five out of the five units have residents who have been diagnosed with cancer, four with bladder cancer and one with lymphoma. We have had the water tested by the State DEP and the result shows no reason for concern. There are seven cell towers within three miles of our building, two of which are within less than one-half mile. 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.

Wireless comment. The change of Florida Power & Light meters to smart meters along with the smart appliances, computer WiFi and multiple cell towers has negatively impacted my sleep, focus and health. Without informed consent, 16 smart meters were installed within 8 feet of my head (when I sleep in my condo). That's when the harm began. I no longer sleep in my bedroom. Over the years the technology installations have grown exponentially. I had no health issues or sleep issues before the unregulated and untested proliferation of "smart" technology. The unwillingness of regulator agencies to protect the public from harm is egregious and criminal. The real data proves harm to all life! Operate from a place of integrity or make way for someone who will.

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: [Please add your personal story here. You may wish to describe how wireless radiation has affected you, your child or family; health effects or cancer you have experienced; concerns about long-term exposure; experiences involving cell phones, Wi-Fi, cell towers or other wireless sources; or impacts you have observed on animals, wildlife, plants or the environment.] 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.

Insomnia has been a constant for me since the rollout of cell towers, wi-fi and the spread of EMFs on a vast scale. The studies made in the '90s based on heat have been shown not to be valid. Please review all studies that show effects of EMFs on the animal and even plant biology. Sincerely, Marie Roulleau

We have a 5G tower less than a mile away. My husband and I wake up with a headache every single day.

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. 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. We are now swimming in a sea of wireless radiation never seen before and it continues to ramp up (3G, 4G, 5G and soon 6G). Radiation is known to impact health and it must be regulated to protect people. This is more than just cell phone heating.

I have eaten at restaurants with 5G on a lightpole across the street. I end up getting dizzy and have loud ringing in my ears. I avoid stores or any place with a 5G tower within a quarter mile.

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: Our family feels the impact of 5G. My husband has an ICD device installed to protect his heart and he can specifically feel the difference when using 5G vs none 5G in our apartment. This impact his health. If he can feel this radiation and signal differently it makes me certain there are effects on others in the home too. We live in Manhattan in a 15 floor apartment building. When studies have been performed, have they been done in high population density environments that have wireless radiation coming at people from above, below and sideways apartments stacked on top and next to each other? I expect our nation's government representatives to make the research and testing of wireless signals a high priority as these signals go inside the body of its people and the government is supposed to protect the people.