{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-2096","body_sha256":"0cb32442e7d4cc9e91f9910038ac15a66fa3187ad809897d9475bd00dc4609c5","status":"ai_reviewed","primary_topic":"standards","topics":[{"id":"standards","evidence":"E DEVICES IN THE AREA SHOULD BE THE ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF RADIATION ALLOWED. 4G worked just fine. Then"},{"id":"cancer","evidence":"d worked the same as 4G but gave more people cancer. Now, they want to implement 6G. For what? To finish u"},{"id":"research","evidence":"n't listen to them! Find good, uncompromised scientists and create standards that prioritize health over funct"}],"summary":"Calls for minimum necessary exposure limits and independent scientific input, citing cancer concerns and opposing 6G.","reviewed_at":"2026-10-10T00:02:05Z","review_method":"Complete published comment-body review; identical previously reviewed bodies reused with separate official IDs preserved. Attachments and external links not reviewed.","review_source_sha256":"2157157db9957566bb023eac6d92d66a0ae96582724693e06e76e569e69c90a8","source_url":"https://rfsafe.net/hhs-comments/data/catalog.json","scope":"Original comment body; attachments excluded"}