Wired connections & alternatives

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.

Re: Health effects of Wireless Radiation, Cell towers, and Smart Utility Meters To the FCC 13-84: I am a resident of Hurricane, Washington County, Utah. I have been diagnosed with electromagnetic radiation (EMR) syndrome, also described as electromagnetic hypersensitivity. I write to request that the Department of Health and Human Services assess the health and safety of wireless infrastructure and of devices that place high-frequency voltage transients on building wiring, including smart utility meters; support independent, biologically based safety testing; and promote meaningful accommodations for people who cannot tolerate these exposures. Personal Circumstances It is critical that I limit exposure to electromagnetic radiation. My household uses a hardwired landline telephone and wired Ethernet. We have shielded our home with protective paint and other mitigation measures, at substantial cost. Even with those steps, I have become increasingly isolated in order to avoid exposures that I experience as medically serious. My autoimmune problems have worsened. My symptoms include, but are not limited to, loss of balance, headaches, chest pain, anemia, elevated blood sugar, hypotension, increased heart rate, and insomnia. I have groceries and prescriptions delivered. A walk outside is often painful. Doctor and dentist visits are very difficult. Hospitals I have used have not provided low-exposure accommodations. Smart Utility Meters I opted out of the electric smart meter. I was charged $228 to do so and then paid $22 per month for the opt-out meter. That opt-out meter produced high levels of electromagnetic interference on the wiring in my house. Average readings exceeded 1,650 mV. To my knowledge, no biologically based pre-market safety testing of this equipment was conducted. Hurricane City Power company did not measure the interference and did not respond for months to my request for an analog meter. When the meter was replaced with an analog meter, average interference readings fell to about 20 mV. The company then charged me $380 for the meter and required a $48 monthly reading fee. Washington County Water Conservancy District Manager Ron Thompson refused to allow me to opt out of the “smart” water meter, despite a letter from my physician. I have also measured radio frequency emissions from neighbors’ meters reaching my property, as well as Wi-Fi from surrounding residences. Other jurisdictions have begun to treat customer choice as a policy issue. Colorado’s H.B. 25-1175, enacted in 2025, requires large investor-owned electric utilities to give residential customers advance notice before installing advanced metering infrastructure and to honor a request for a noncommunicating meter. The statute does not create an unlimited statewide ban on installation and does not cover water meters. I cite it only as an example of a notice-and-choice framework that remains unavailable to many utility customers, including water customers in my area. The bill is available at https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb25-1175. Cell Tower Near My Home A cell tower was placed next to my home on property owned by the Washington County Water Conservancy District, without notice to residents. There was no meaningful opportunity for public comment because residents were not notified. No environmental review was conducted. The tower is in the fall zone of a water tank and is close to residences. The tower was originally approved for three antennas. Many additional antennas have since been added, including a 5G upgrade and antennas for an internet provider. There was again no environmental review for the 5G upgrade. In 2009, a cell tower was approved—again without notice—within about 100 feet of my property and between two residential developments. No cellular service was provided for the next three years. In 2011, AT&T contracted to place cellular antennas on the tower. Additional antennas have been added or “upgraded” since then, including 5G service, without notice or review under the National Environmental Policy Act. Other internet providers have also been added. Upon activation of service on this tower in 2013, radiation levels increased and the quality of cell service declined sharply. Before the nearby tower was activated, I had about four bars of reception. After activation, I often have no bars, and occasionally one bar. Many neighbors report the same problem. This result is contrary to what residents expected. The previous nearest tower was about seven miles away. Because there were few obstructions, service at my location had been relatively good. Antennas on the new tower are directed toward the Hurricane Cliffs, which rise about 1,000 feet above our home. Reflected, out-of-phase signals can degrade service and can redirect scattered energy back toward the residential area. I contacted the Federal Communications Commission. The agency showed no interest in measuring or testing the signals. Other, more remote sites were available and would have reduced reflection from the cliffs. When my husband and I asked an employee of the tower company why this site was chosen, the answer was economic: it was cheaper to build where electrical and road infrastructure already existed. Some residents have been forced to install indoor small cells in their homes in order to obtain usable service. According to Verizon, coverage from such equipment can extend to multiple users. That radiation can reach neighboring properties. Loss of Wired Service Relying on landline DSL for internet and telephone service is no longer workable. CenturyLink is not maintaining the copper landline, and electromagnetic interference has made that line effectively useless. In a utilities easement near my home there are two radio frequency-emitting water meters, one radio frequency-emitting electric meter, a fiber-optic utilities box, and an electrical transformer. Their close proximity may be contributing to the landline interference. Fiber-optic service is available, but it is owned by an internet provider rather than by Washington County, which limits competition. Fiber also does not support traditional alarm-line service in the same way, and the optical equipment at the premises does not function when household electricity fails. Interference with Implanted Medical Devices A friend who used our tennis court later received a pacemaker. After the implant, he could no longer play on the court because the pacemaker stopped working there. When he entered our shielded home, the pacemaker functioned again. This occurred twice. The American Heart Association notes that certain electrical and radio frequency sources can interfere with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. See https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/arrhythmia/prevention--treatment-of-arrhythmia/devices-that-may-interfere-with-icds-and-pacemakers. My husband’s grandchild, who has epilepsy, collapsed while playing on our tennis court. My husband has an Inspire implant to treat sleep apnea. He is concerned that electrical and wireless interference could impair the device and, in turn, his breathing. Radio frequency levels at St. George Regional Hospital have been high enough that the Inspire implant did not work there. The manufacturer’s materials discuss electromagnetic interference. See https://manuals.inspiresleep.com/. Neighborhood Health Observations I cannot prove that any individual illness was caused by the tower or by smart meters. I report the following because residents are frightened, some have moved or chosen not to build, and the pattern is why I ask the Department to investigate rather than leave the matter solely to the Federal Communications Commission. Individuals have died, and several people have told me they believe their symptoms are related to the tower or to smart utility meters. A neighbor had prostate cancer that was not initially thought to be fatal. The disease progressed despite extensive treatment, and he died. I noticed a smart utility meter on the wall outside the bedroom where the head of his bed was placed. The smart meters in our development are relatively high-powered because of large lot sizes of one acre or more. A neighbor died of a heart attack while walking along the road. Another neighbor had a heart attack while walking along the road. My late husband had a heart attack while walking along the road. Four other neighbors have had heart attacks. One neighbor who lived next to the cell tower had bowel cancer, was in remission, and later died of a pulmonary embolism. A neighbor allowed an internet provider to place an antenna on his home, over his office, to serve the surrounding area. He died of cancer. A woman who had been in remission from multiple myeloma came out of remission. Some residents have moved because of the tower. One decided not to build on their lot. As I understand the occupancy of the development, there are 41 lots, of which about eight are vacant; about 33 homes; and about 22 full-time residences. Among those households I am aware of three cancer deaths, eight heart attacks, including three fatal heart attacks, and one suicide of a person suffering severe pain. These are community observations, not a controlled study. My stepson and his wife lived in Magna, Utah, close to a cell tower. He died of stage 4 metastatic stomach cancer at age 54. His wife died shortly afterward. The spread of wireless radiation has been life-altering for me. I cannot use my pool or tennis court, and I cannot enjoy a walk. I am struggling with repeated infections and an immune system that no longer functions as it should. Requested Action The Department should take responsibility for assessing the safety of wireless devices and of equipment that places high-frequency voltage transients onto building wiring, including smart utility meters. Existing federal exposure limits and siting practices have not answered the health questions raised by people in my situation. I agree with the following recommendations of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields: 1. Update national exposure limits on wireless, power-frequency, and other non-ionizing electromagnetic fields to reflect current scientific evidence and to protect against biological effects. 2. Fund independent research on long-term, cumulative biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. 3. Require independent pre-market safety testing and independent post-market surveillance for wireless and other electromagnetic-field-emitting devices. 4. Ensure compliance tests for cell phones and Wi-Fi devices reflect children’s physiology and real-world use, including direct body contact. 5. Halt introduction of new technologies until rigorous pre-market safety testing is performed. 6. Inform families about the scientific literature on health risks and about ways to reduce exposure from phones, wireless devices, electronics, and other sources of electromagnetic fields. 7. Adopt a risk-mitigation approach that reduces children’s daily exposure at home and school and limits their use of wireless devices. 8. Promote safer designs, including wired networks, low-emission equipment, and devices that minimize user exposure. 9. Establish low-electromagnetic-field spaces in schools as a priority. I also ask the Department to support: A. Non-punitive analog or noncommunicating meter options for customers with medical need, including water as well as electric service; B. Meaningful public notice and health-focused review before cell towers are sited near homes or upgraded with additional antennas or 5G equipment; C. Preservation and maintenance of wired telephone and internet options; D. Low-electromagnetic-field accommodations in hospitals and clinics, especially for patients with implants or reported electromagnetic sensitivity; and E. Coordination with the Federal Communications Commission that does not treat thermal exposure limits as the end of the health inquiry, consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, available at https://www.fcc.gov/document/dc-circuit-decision-environmental-health-trust-v-fcc. The proliferation of wireless infrastructure is, for me and for several of my neighbors, not a convenience issue. It is a housing, medical-access, and daily-function issue. I respectfully ask the Department to treat it as a matter of public health. Respectfully submitted, Rosemarie Russell 854 W 3390 S Hurricane, Utah 84737

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.

In 2012 I was exposed to high levels of pulsed microwave radiation from two digital utility meters outside my recently acquired apartment bedroom wall. I experienced a host of symptoms which included: brain fog, fatigue, dizziness, difficulty sleeping and headaches. To this day I am sensitive to exposure from wireless radiation at certain levels. This has greatly limited my ability to work in many environments and is limiting in my families options for many modern conveniences and functional technology. I have a wife and an eight year old and 4 month old daughter. We use hardwired connection in our home and use cell phones conservatively. I am asking you to consider the scientific literature in order to move forward with any policies and decisions regarding the safety of this technology. It isn't fair that some people have to struggle to navigate the world because of this technology. Everyone is affected but some people are acutely affected and aware of the harms regarding this technology. Thank you

Where are all the safety studies promised from the outcome of Children's Health Defense 2021 lawsuit toward the FCC? I was on a Zoom, which RFK Jr. and the CHD attorney for the case, Daphne Tachover, were on, in August 2020 about this. God bliss them both. How come Conneticut Senator Richard Blumenthal was concerned about no studies for 5G in 2019, and then 5G was installed during the carefully coordinated covid lockdown, which representatives are too red taped to admit? https://youtube.com/watch?v=hsil3VQE5K4. Wish Senator Blumenthal was as concerned about the covid shots, as Senator Ron Johnson is. Also, what effects is EMF having on those injected or PCR'ed or geoengineering loads? Dr. Ana Maria Mihalcea shows self-assemblying nanotechnology in people's blood. Dr. David Nixon shows self-assemblying nano technology, as well, in the covid shots, whether one wishes to believe it, or otherwise: https://DrDavidNixon.com. Here is a peer reviewed study on it: https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/102/291. People have been picked up on Bluetooth, too. https://rumble.com/v48wr4o-the-bluetruth-documentary.html. Explain. Please provide the safety studies needed for cell generations. Also, provide school district funding to educate parents and students on EMF safety equipment and financially support fiber internet. There are enough people with disabilities - EMF sensitivites to consider. And demand copper wire is available for landlines. Regarding cell phones, educate all on these, too. They get hot, and people like myself's skin breaks out when holding them. Also, a computer technician, by trade, neighbor of mine had developed brain cancer. I wonder. RIP. Please protect us all, "We the People," health is number 1. Thank you.

One time I was sitting in the public library, using their WIFI, with my tablet, since I do not have WIFI at home and wanted to download something. My computer system at home is hard-wired. Driving home, I could barely stay in my lane, because my mind was so befuddled, I think because of the WIFI. I feel for the people who have to be in school, in public or in a workplace with WIFI unavoidably impinging on them. My hearing aids are some of the last models made which have FLIGHT MODE, whereby the bluetooth may be turned off. I have to turn it off each time I put them on, using a certain sequence of button presses. Until I have it properly turned off, I feel the bluetooth in my brain. It is difficult to describe the feeling of electromagnetic radiation. It is not like saying, "I have an earache" or "a tummy ache", as we would say to our mothers. It is akin to a pressure, a dark vapor, an unwelcomed presence. I feel the effects first in my head, then a tightness in the area of my heart. Of course, wireless radiation is immensly convenient and profitable, but I believe it is harmful, not just to sensitive people, and many are much more sensitive than myself, but to everyone in its proximity.

i have had the following symptoms from combinations and interactions of emf pollution and vaccine shedding: hemorrhage from ears, nose, rectum, vagina, bladder ocular hemorrhage, a very painful condition which affected my vision, and from which I, have not yet fully recovered throat swelling or irritation, sore throat headaches, commonly occipital, parietal, and frontal brain fog, confusion, slow thinking, transient aphasia disorientation in space or time, sometimes leading to falls or minor injury; sore, blocked meridians indications of cerebellar interference such as uncoordination of left and right or arms and legs sinus irritation, pain, congestion, or pressure as though a cold is coming on, with sneezing, cough, and runny nose bruising on hands or arms, usually from directly touching the skin of an injected person, occasionally from proximity alone pressure or pain in ears, temporary dulling of hearing tinnitus, frequently sudden-onset upon exposure pain in appendix muscular cramps in legs or feet chest tightness, spasm, pain; difficult to inhale; poor perfusion while breathing hard nausea heart spasm and pain; sometimes feels as though my heart is struggling to beat, or jumping out of my chest tachycardia, usually briefly, upon initial contact extended periods of elevated heart rate, even while lying down vertigo abdominal spasm or pain spasm or aching in spleen diarrhea lienteric stool ovaritis, sudden sharp pain or aching of ovaries, or generalized pelvic pain, pelvic inflammation bladder spasm, urgency to urinate, similar to UTI symptoms anxiety insomnia mood swings brain fog feeling dazed malaise shortness of breath sudden-onset weakness fatigue, frequently sudden-onset visual blurring or distortion conjunctivitis rashes, often continuing for several days after exposure cysts, developing the day following exposure, slow to resolve sudden-onset desire to flee feeling of dread: oh, no, i, feel those same toxins again! feeling of panic or fear at the strong possibility that I’m getting yet another headache, and my breathing is being inhibited—again—by these same, now-familiar toxins kidney pain body aches fever plantar fasciitis cough, excessive phlegm lymphatic congestion, especially inguinal, axillary, submandibular asthmatic wheezing coccygeal nerve pain neuralgia in hands, legs, feet, neck, head high white blood cell count, observed under microscope through live blood analysis in october 2023, accompanied by fatigue and mild fever general feeling of assault to my aura, bioelectric field anxiety, stress, health issues such as sinus pressure, congestion, swollen lymph nodes, eye irritation and hemorrhage; malaise, brain fog and feeling dazed, mood swings, sore throat, aching chest pain; and an increase in static electricity from my body; all shortly after known exposure; these have happened repeatedly and still happen to this day; grief over loss of connection to soulful companions; concern of great potential for disease due to dna damage; existential disquietude over potential loss of identity due to dna degradation; economic hardship due to inability to serve vaccinated persons in capacity of touch-related assistance; that is, i, develop debilitating symptoms upon touching a vaccinated person, and am unable to continue; i do and have never had a mobile phone, as i find it harmful to touch one (if it is on). i have myself observed with a small rf meter, the interaction between signals from covid injected persons and wi fi, cell towers, mobile phones; i do assert that this phenomenon exists. if the rf signal is low or blocked enough that it does not harm me, the cell phone does not work. all of these devices must be removed from the environment altogether. i am available and would be happy to testify at court, provided that i will not be irradiated at the courthouse, as this is harmful. for more references on this issue, please see 2:26-cv-oo795-sdm, mauger v. ebel, currently filed at federal district court columbus ohio; i am a witness for this claim. i have interviewed approximately thirty people regarding these issues; i can provide contacts for more statements. here is my landline number: 513 489 9777; i invite a phonecall. thank you, beverly

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 personally because I am negatively physically affected by RF radiation exposure and microwave radiation. I have to use my landline for communication. I will NOT give up my landline. I can't have Wi-Fi on my computer because, again, it affects my physical well-being. 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.

PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING THE D.C. CIRCUIT REMAND ON RF RADIATION EXPOSURE GUIDELINES I am submitting this comment in direct response to the remand ordered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which mandated that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) provide a reasoned explanation for maintaining its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court made it abundantly clear that the FCC failed to establish that its 1996 guidelines adequately protect against non-cancer health effects, cumulative long-term exposures, vulnerability in developing children, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. As a communications regulator rather than a biomedical or health agency, the FCC cannot continue to dismiss peer-reviewed scientific evidence and real-world human experience while clinging to obsolete, thermal-only models. Why This Issue Matters Personally In my day-to-day work and personal life, I regularly interact with individuals, families, and chronically ill patients who report debilitating sensitivities and symptom flares when exposed to ambient, near-field, and cumulative wireless radiation. From headaches, brain fog, and severe sleep disruptions to heightened biological stress responses, these experiences are real, observable, and disruptive to daily living. Modern life has created an unprecedented environmental shift: citizens no longer experience single, isolated RF exposures. Instead, we are subjected to a continuous, overlapping blanket of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from modern cell phones held directly against the body, high-output Wi-Fi routers operating 24/7 in homes and schools, smart utility meters, and an accelerating density of small-cell infrastructure placed within feet of bedroom windows. To achieve even a baseline level of comfort and restorative sleep, an increasing number of people are forced to take extraordinary measures—relying on RF shielding fabrics, hardwired Ethernet connections, and physical barriers just to reduce ambient field exposure in their own living spaces. When individuals consistently experience tangible relief and improved well-being simply by eliminating or attenuating these fields, the agency's insistence that "no non-thermal biological effects exist" is directly contradicted by everyday reality. Furthermore, testing protocols that rely on large plastic mannequins (such as the legacy SAM phantom) filled with liquid do not reflect real-world device usage. Real people—and specifically children with thinner skulls, developing central nervous systems, and smaller body geometries—absorb proportionally higher rates of radiation from devices used directly against the head and lap. Direct Actions Requested of the Commission In accordance with the D.C. Circuit’s mandate, the FCC must: Defer to Legitimate Health Authorities: Re-engage with independent biomedical researchers, toxicologists, and relevant federal health agencies—including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)—rather than relying on decades-old industry assumptions. Update Testing Procedures for Modern Devices: Overhaul device compliance testing so that cell phones, tablets, and wearable tech are evaluated in direct contact with biological tissue at maximum power output, eliminating artificial separation distances. Establish Biologically Based Standards: Transition away from an outdated thermal-only standard to an exposure model that accounts for chronic, low-level, non-thermal biological impacts, pulsed wave modulations, and cumulative lifetime exposures. Evaluate Environmental and Wildlife Impacts: Give substantive, non-dismissive consideration to the documented impacts of radiofrequency radiation on plant biology, pollinator behavior, and avian populations. The public record must reflect that the public demands accountability, scientific integrity, and public health safeguards over unchecked commercial deployment. I urge the Commission to address each deficiency identified by the federal court completely, transparently, and rigorously. Respectfully submitted, James Concerned Citizen & Clean Environment Advocate

I am highly concerned about the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The FCC has no authority or expertise in biology or public health nor have they studied RF radiation affects on public health, but the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards. RF radiation DOES affect public health and DOES cause biological harm. This issue matters to me personally because I am sensitive to ALL wireless devices, including cell towers, cell phones, and smart meters. I became sensitive seven years ago after driving a newer car equipped with bluetooth devices. After researching the internet to understand my condition, I sold that car and removed all wireless devices from our house, because they cause me to have hours of painful headaches which nothing, except 10-24 hours of staying at home, will remove; our house is now wired with ethernet. Where I frequently drive, there are six cell towers within ten miles of my house. These wireless devices are dangerous to human and animal health. More wireless will cause chronic illness to continue rising and even death for millions of people. I urge the FCC to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence of others and to fully address each of the issues identified by the court.