Requests transparent assessment of wireless health evidence, distinguishing animal findings from human ri…

As a mother and a longtime Santa Monica resident, I want families to have clear, trustworthy information about wireless radiation and health. Technology is part of everyday life, and I want federal agencies to examine potential risks carefully and explain what is known, what remains uncertain, and what practical steps are justified by the evidence. I submit this comment as an individual member of the public, not as a scientific expert. My requests are informed by the peer-reviewed review cited below. I ask HHS and the FCC to conduct transparent, independent assessments of radiofrequency exposure that consider children, long-term and repeated exposure, and realistic conditions of device use. Mevissen and colleagues (2025) reviewed experimental animal cancer studies and reported high-certainty evidence for increased glioma and malignant heart schwannoma in male rats. The authors also emphasize that extrapolating these findings to human risk is complex. These findings warrant careful evaluation; they do not, by themselves, establish that everyday wireless exposure causes cancer in people. Please assess this review alongside its 2026 corrigendum, the underlying studies, and relevant human research, including findings that do not show harm. I respectfully request that the agencies: 1. Publish an accessible assessment that distinguishes biological changes from adverse health outcomes, animal findings from human evidence, and established conclusions from uncertainty. Explain study quality, exposure levels, limitations, and conflicting results. 2. Explain whether current exposure limits and compliance testing adequately address children, long-term use, and devices used close to the body. Identify where evidence supports current practices and where additional testing or research is needed. 3. Prioritize independent, reproducible research on developmental and neurological outcomes, reproductive health, and cumulative exposure, with transparent funding and conflict-of-interest disclosures. 4. Provide practical guidance on reducing unnecessary exposure where warranted, while preserving access to communication, education, and assistive technology. For HHS, please use this request for information to identify concrete research priorities and public-health guidance needs. For the FCC, please provide a reasoned response to the evidence relevant to the court-remanded issues, including non-cancer outcomes, children, and testing procedures. The cancer review cited here is offered as broader scientific context, not as proof of non-cancer effects or a substitute for addressing the specific remand record. Families deserve decisions supported by rigorous science and explanations they can understand. Thank you for considering my comment.