Opposes tower expansion, cites animal and human studies and the FCC remand, and advocates exposure measur…

The seriousness of this can be summed up easily and we need to put a stop the massive infrastructure being built asap. Health>Money “The brain is an electromagnetic. A cell tower is an electromagnetic transmitter operating at a frequency, modulation, and duty cycle the brain does not produce. Exposure from a tower is continuous and involuntary. A limit written only to prevent heating does not answer whether that field alters the electrical activity the brain depends on.” This comment is against cell towers, base stations, and small cells. The exposure they produce is involuntary, continuous, and aimed at homes, schools, and workplaces. A person can put a phone down. No one can opt out of a tower. Human beings are electrical. Nerve conduction, cardiac rhythm, and the voltage across cell membranes are measurable processes. A tower is an electromagnetic transmitter running all day, at a frequency and modulation the body does not produce. Federal limits address heating only. The tower studies looked past heating and found tumors. The study built as a base-station experiment is Falcioni et al., Environmental Research (2018), from the Ramazzini Institute. It exposed 2,448 rats from before birth until natural death to a 1.8 GHz GSM far-field signal at 5, 25, and 50 V/m, 19 hours a day, meant to resemble an antenna rather than a handset against the head. Male rats at 50 V/m had a statistically significant increase in malignant heart schwannomas. Schwann-cell hyperplasia rose in both sexes at that dose. The estimated whole-body absorption at 50 V/m was about 0.1 W/kg, far under the 1.6 W/kg phone limit, and the field strength sits under the FCC public limit of 10 W/m² in that band. The cancers appeared at exposures the current rules allow. The National Toxicology Program’s 2018 reports found the same tumor under near-field, phone-like modulation: clear evidence of malignant heart schwannomas in male rats, and some evidence of brain gliomas, plus DNA damage in brain tissue. Two designs, near-field and far-field, produced the same heart tumor. Mevissen et al., the World Health Organization systematic review of the animal cancer studies (Environment International, 2025), rated the evidence high certainty for an increase in heart schwannomas in male rats and high certainty for an increase in glioma. Those are the tumors the International Agency for Research on Cancer cited in 2011 when it classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as Group 2B, possibly carcinogenic to humans, on limited evidence of glioma and acoustic neuroma. Acoustic neuroma is a schwannoma of the vestibulocochlear nerve. People living near antennas show the same direction of effect, in smaller studies. Eger et al. (2004), in Naila, Germany, found new cancer cases about 3.4 times higher within 400 meters of a base station in the five years after it began operating, and patients diagnosed about 8.5 years younger. Wolf and Wolf (2004), in Netanya, Israel, reported cancer incidence about 4 times higher within 350 meters. Dode et al. (2011), in Belo Horizonte, found cancer mortality about 1.35 times higher within 100 meters of a base station, falling with distance. Balmori’s 2022 review of 38 studies of people living near base stations reported effects in 28 of them, including radiofrequency sickness, cancer, and biochemical changes. These are not large prospective cohorts. They are the human record that exists for towers, and it does not show safety. In 2021 the D.C. Circuit remanded the FCC’s decision to keep its 1996 limits (Environmental Health Trust v. FCC). The court held that the agency had not explained effects other than cancer, effects on children, long-term exposure, the spread of transmitters since the limits were written, or the environment. Towers are the environmental exposure. Children in schools and homes nearest the antennas have no say in it, and they will carry it for decades. HHS should tell the FCC, state health departments, and local governments the following. No new tower, macro site, or small cell, school, childcare center, or playground. Existing sites inside that distance should be disclosed, measured at the property line and in the nearest classrooms, and removed or powered down where a wired alternative exists. Cumulative exposure from every antenna on a structure counts, not one site at a time. Backhaul and school networks should be wired. Thermal compliance is not a health finding. The far-field experiment already produced the tumor at a level the rules permit. Refrences attached