{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5078","number":"5078","name":"Dalinda Reese","organization":"","posted":"2026-10-26T04:00Z","received":"2026-10-21T04:00Z","body":"I am a retired integrative medicine physician.  After board certifications in Internal Medicine and Anesthesia and two decades of practice in Anesthesia, I went into Integrative Medicine to recover my own health and to help address the root causes of the increasing burden of chronic diseases. \n\nThank you for this opportunity to comment.  Most regulatory agencies have betrayed the public trust (and our health) by failing to adhere to the Precautionary Principle.  Industry has been allowed to proceed without providing evidence of safety.\n\nThere are over 1000 studies on the harms of Electro Magnetic Fields, the abstracts of which are catelogued by Green Med Info at https://greenmedinfo.com/problematic-action/electromagnetic-field-harms?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email\n\nAND yet, the FCC continues to ignore a 2021 court order to update its Electromagnetic Field safety studies.  Meanwhile, rollout continues on 5G, 6G, satellite, IoT, smart meters cell towers, and other sources of EMF exposure. The peer-reviewed record on 5G, 6G, satellite, IoT and smart-meter exposures is not adequate for safety assessment (Simkó & Mattsson, Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31540320/, concluded available studies \"do not provide adequate and sufficient information for a meaningful safety assessment\"). This is a gap.  This is definitely not reassurance!(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047144/; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34243228/); Balmori, Sci Total Environ 2015 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25747364/).\n\nSince the HHS, through the FDA is the agency that is positioned to supply the health-science information that the court found missing, I ask for a federal evidence review that holds agencies and industry to the Precautionary Principle.\n \nHere are 6 meta-analyses that give evidence of harm effects at or below current limits:\n\nEffects at or below current limits\n\n\nZendehdel R, et al. DNA effects of low level occupational exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (50/60 Hz). Toxicol Ind Health. 2019. Utility workers at median 0.85 µT — below the ACGIH TLV — showed significantly increased DNA strand breaks. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31138035/\n\nEsmailzadeh S, et al. Exposure to electromagnetic fields of high voltage overhead power lines and female infertility. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2019. Residence within 500 m: adjusted OR 4.44 (95% CI 2.77–7.11). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30685773/\n\nZhao L, et al. Magnetic fields exposure and childhood leukemia risk: a meta-analysis based on 11,699 cases and 13,194 controls. Leuk Res. 2014. ≥0.4 µT: OR 1.57 (1.03–2.40); ALL: OR 2.43 (1.30–4.55). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24388073/\n\nWartenberg D. Residential EMF exposure and childhood leukemia: meta-analysis and population attributable risk. Bioelectromagnetics. 2001. If causal, 175–240 U.S. childhood leukemia cases attributable. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11170120/\n\nNational Toxicology Program. Cell Phone Radio Frequency Radiation Studies, TR 595/596 (Nov. 2018). \"Clear evidence\" of malignant heart schwannomas and \"some evidence\" of malignant gliomas in male rats. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones\n\nBroom KA, et al. Early-life exposure to pulsed LTE radiofrequency fields causes persistent changes in activity and behavior in C57BL/6 J mice. Bioelectromagnetics. 2019. SAR-dependent behavioural changes at 0.5–1 W/kg. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31522469/","attachments":[],"attachment_inventory":true,"withheld":false,"source":"https://www.regulations.gov/comment/HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5078","tags":["cancer-tumors","child-development","health-experiences","biology-metabolism","exposure-places","policy-standards","research-evidence"],"source_hash":"5fd363b25108a0cfcdcde0809cd1780ca5391823642389704c9f0981e51cf7b3","slug":"cancer-tumors-comment-5078","classification":{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5078","body_sha256":"652dfa439e2dc422e668f9bcbe57be9f6113d8f17d80276dc37c97da2c7184fd","status":"ai_reviewed","primary_topic":"standards","topics":[{"id":"standards","evidence":"(and our health) by failing to adhere to the Precautionary Principle.  Industry has been allowed to proceed without providing evidenc"},{"id":"research","evidence":"on that the court found missing, I ask for a federal evidence review that holds agencies and industry to the Precautionary Principle."},{"id":"cancer","evidence":"\nZhao L, et al. Magnetic fields exposure and childhood leukemia risk: a meta-analysis based on 11,699 cases and 13,194 controls."},{"id":"reproductive","evidence":"lds of high voltage overhead power lines and female infertility. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2019. Residence within 500 m: adjusted"},{"id":"electricity","evidence":"et al. Exposure to electromagnetic fields of high voltage overhead power lines and female infertility. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2019. Residence"},{"id":"occupational","evidence":"Zendehdel R, et al. DNA effects of low level occupational exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (50/60 Hz). To"}],"summary":"A retired physician urges precautionary federal review, cites studies on cancer and other health effects, and argues that evidence for newer technologies remains inadequate for safety assessment.","reviewed_at":"2026-10-26T22:22:05Z","review_method":"Full comment-text review with exact source evidence; attachments not reviewed","review_source_sha256":"400154b5f25438795f21ef7758a646d3623366e7b5a0e79678b97ce6eee2812e","source_url":"https://rfsafe.net/hhs-comments/data/catalog.json","scope":"Original comment body; attachments excluded"},"forum_topics":["standards","research","cancer","reproductive","electricity","occupational"],"primary_topic":"standards","forum_title":"A retired physician urges precautionary federal review, cites studies on cancer and other health effects,…"}