Wi-Fi, meters & wireless devices

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 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 nor is it an expert in medicine, but it continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. This issue matters to me personally because I truly thought I was going to die young as any and all I tried did not work. In fact, the 15 different problems I had just kept getting worse, until I read and read and research, and talked to others until it all pointed to EMF toxicity. Once I took care to "distance and avoid" problems disappeared. No one talks about the dangers of EMF; no one informs the customer buying wireless gadgets it could be harmful. That's why I had to suffer for years until I did my own research and found a way to help myself. Even today, if I'm out in a heavy EMF area or if in a room full of people cell phones, I feel terrible. This is a real problem! I bought an expensive meter to see that it was not "in my head". No, it's a real problem alright. 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 FCC must act in accordance w/ the federal order. I would like FCC to do their job and do it well and thoroughly. Thank you for this opportunity to express what is a very real and personal problem.

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: After installation of a 5g tower within 1/4 mile of my home, we have experienced strange muscle pains along with GI issues. 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. 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 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: Several members of or household are noticeably affected by wireless technologies. I experience physical symptoms of anxiety without any anxious thoughts when I hold my cellphone for too long. Symptoms include shakiness, externally visible heart palpitations, butterflies in my stomach, and an overwhelming urgency to put the phone down even though I am not done composing or reading an important message or email. I also get hot on my ear or side of head if I make a long call, or that hand gets oddly numb or tingly, or my ear starts ringing. Two members of our family have neurological problems that got considerably better when we turned the wifi router off. 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 electromagnetic sensitive and have a negative reaction to wireless radiation and strong magnetic fields. Because wireless and 5G technology is everywhere, it is hard for my body to recover enough to heal. I am concerned about my children who are exposed to wireless in their school s. 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 FCC needs to reconsider the parameters regarding any ‘HARM’ that they are looking at. Previously they have only tested for the transference of ‘HEAT’ – that shows a disturbing lack of understanding of EMFs. I hope it is understood that devices such as microwave ovens, cell towers and cell phones emit certain frequences that cannot be seen, felt or smelled by a regular human being. This does not mean that they don’t exist and/or don’t cause harm! Take the example of X-rays. When I was growing up, when you went to a shoe store, you would expected to find an X-ray machine in every store so that customers could check to see if the shoe was a good fit for the foot. As kids we would take great delight in checking as many shoes as we could. It would take many years before it was discovered that X-rays were actually harmful to the human body! I suspect that the FCC is not taking the similarity between the seemingly harmless EMF frequencies and the dangerous effects of X-rays seriously enough. I was made aware of the effect of EMF’s when I was at a conference a few years ago in a hotel that was right next to a cell tower. One woman complained of feeling unsteady and slightly sick. She couldn’t come up with any reason why she might feel that way. When she moved closer to the center of the hotel the miserable, unsettling feelings would reduce a little. When she went outside she felt like collapsing, almost like her energy was being drained away from her. Since then I have heard of people who have had similar experiences and it has since been revealed that certain people are more sensitive to these EMF frequences than others. Like in the woman at the conference, no one else noticed anything untoward. Also, the FCC years ago was testing for the effects of the EMFs on plants. They promised to go back and do more of those tests, but they never did. I suspect that much could be learned by doing more investigations in that arena.

In 2021 I developed a cardiac arrhythmia (heart palpitation). I was 62 years old. I have been physically active my whole life including 18 years of playing box lacrosse. I found out about symptoms of EMF radiation and an arrhythmia was on the list along with sleep disorders. I immediately removed 2 cell phones, all cordless phones, wi-fi and turned off the "smart meter", on our property. Within one week my heart rhythm had gone back to normal and within about 6 months my sleep returned to a depth where I had forgotten about it. I have been formally trained as an Electronics Technologist (Telecommunications) and an Emergency Medical Technician - Ambulance. The arrhythmia as not returned and I continue to get deep sleep up to this day.

1) Walking through the millimeter-wave Airport Scanner caused my vision to change. It took 8 hours for my vision to stop being blurry, and start reading again. Later that day -in 2012- I have learned that in UK already had substantial data about damage to cornea of the eye, testicles, and breast tissue. An organization of passengers pushed for removing these scanners from airports. 2) 5-G router siting 5 feet from my desk cause my neck getting hot, and thyroid tissue feeling stressed, after 2 days of sitting at that location. After I moved 20 feet away- no longer a problem. But certainly concerning. Thank you.

The FCC should fully consider the effects of its wireless radiation policies on health, although the FCC is not a health agency. Therefore, it must consider the evidence and real world experience of persons in it. For fifteen years I have battled these symptoms from wireless radiation: Sleeplessness; Restless leg syndrome; Shortness of breath; Dizziness; Nausea; Tinnitus; Extreme fatigue; Heart palpitations; Vibrations passing through me as if I were jello; Brain fog and concentration issues; To combat these ailments, and others not listed here, I shield myself 25/7 in some way: I have put up metalic paper in my rented condo where possible. I wear a shielding jumpsuit (it is warm in summer) and a head-covering daily. I sleep between layers of shielding fabric and a sleep cap. I do not subscribe to internet in my residence nor do I use an internet phone. Still, the wifi readings in my place are very high and spike into the red danger zone throughout the day. Let it be known, due to more recent health impact studies, the present-day meters are out of date as to the levels considered "danger zones." To be brief, these issues have impacted my studies, my job choices, and living accommodations and forced relocations. It has disconnected me from family and friends due to incompatible environments. There is no where to hide; at least, none I could afford or would survive, such as an unpopulated island. Alexandra Fileccia-Busch fileccia2011@gmail.com

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 a practicing Internal Medicine physician with additional expertise in Integrative Medicine, which uses biologic strategies to reverse chronic illnesses. I also suffer from chronic illness myself, and as such have found myself extraordinarily sensitive to the presence of the microwave carrier frequencies used ubiquitously by the telecom industry (cell towers and cell phones), home and office connective infrastructure (WiFi routers, computers using WiFi, office equipment continuously emitting wireless radiation, even the newer automobiles that continuously emit wireless radiation. I have extensively measured my local environment with a portable, handheld wireless emissions meter and made a note where they are particularly high. I have discovered that whenever I am exposed to these areas, even for an hour or two, I experience physical effects. This happens in a relatively stereotyped sequence, starting after about 3 hours with activation of my sympathetic autonomic system (ie, "fight or flight" system, due to immediate damage), then progressing to difficulty sleeping that night, sometimes accompanied by a "restless legs" feeling (which I otherwise never have) and then fairly profound fatigue for the next 2 to 3 days, until my system recovers, utilizing passage of time in the relatively "safer" environment of my home, along with several biological strategies required for recovery. Fortunately, I have been able to eliminate wireless devices in my home by using a router which connects via data cable to my computer, along with using hardwire connections to printer, etc. Measurements of radiation have confirmed fairly low levels, though I still have ambient radiation from neighbors, local cell towers, etc. I also keep my cell phone on airplane mode except to text, essentially never using my cell phone for calls. I have also noted extreme stiffness of my knee joints when in high exposure areas. I also believe that, even in the relatively lower exposure area of my home, my sleep is unnaturally difficult, and that my bowel function is unnaturally sluggish. Certainly as a result of my own experiences, let alone millions of my fellow countrymen and women and children who don't have the benefit of a medical education and experience practicing Integrative medicine to understand this exposure from a technical perspective, 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.

There is a cell tower a mile from me and in 2022 At&t put in new WIFI. Since then I got a melanoma on my face. . I am usually very energetic, lost it and suffer bad fatigue, acquired lots of popping in tendons, intense sneezing and congestion. Pain all over my body that I struggle to get to work. My little cat was diagnosed with diabetes in Jan 2023. He has none of the normal markers to have gotten it. His appetite slowed to a snails pace where before he was a food hound. I noticed 2 elm trees right outside started just drying up. Had to fertilize this year to bring them back. I have been in this house 23 yrs. and the last 4 have been hell, I just don't feel like myself . I even put WIFI protection stickers on my computer and tablets. This on top of all the sky spraying chemtrails, Life is becoming unbearable anymore.