{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-4005","body_sha256":"ef5f722662d23b5eb8f8c3e1d430699580ff0978ff1c8e52fd47a5395f86029a","status":"ai_reviewed","primary_topic":"research","topics":[{"id":"research","evidence":"ic issues in evidence interpretation and the governance of scientific uncertainty. These analyses examine how differences in evidentiary framework"},{"id":"standards","evidence":"tructures that are currently responsible for setting limits are not well suited to registering that strength. The attached s"},{"id":"cancer","evidence":"dent research: an evidence assessment of the RF-EMF cancer and genotoxicity literature, and an analysis of the governance a"},{"id":"mechanisms","evidence":"coping review and evidence map of the RF-EMF genotoxicity literature, an independent assessment of the evidence concerning"},{"id":"smart-meters","evidence":"y are compared with symptoms reported in two smart-meter datasets: Lamech 2014, a peer-reviewed case series, and Halteman 2011, a "}],"summary":"The commenter outlines an evidence and governance critique of RF safety assurances, drawing on cancer, genotoxicity and exposure reports, and argues that institutional practices and funding influence interpretation without claiming established human carcinogenicity.","reviewed_at":"2026-10-21T23:43:28Z","review_method":"Complete submitted comment-text review with neutral attributed summaries and exact evidence; attachments and external materials not reviewed.","review_source_sha256":"e0920272fca486da47aca1ed0fc7a75cfc3eb8fa8fd6e175af81adbdcfad5ec2","source_url":"https://rfsafe.net/hhs-comments/data/catalog.json","scope":"Original comment body; attachments excluded"}