AI summary & topic connections

Reports a partner's electrohypersensitivity, symptoms and repeated relocation near wireless sources, and requests lower exposure limits, research and low-EMF refuge areas.

  • Electromagnetic sensitivity: “adiation Exposure. My partner suffers from "electro hypersensitivity syndrome" She can not be exposed to the field of cell phone towers WiFi o”
  • Housing, work & access barriers: “y for more than a couple of hours at a time. We have moved several times because of radiation fields or cell phone towers too close, and ”
  • Heart symptoms & implanted devices: “m locks up and she can (and does) experience heart palpitations, nervous attacks, loss of sleep, and even fainting. She can not ”
  • Neurological symptoms & sleep: “erience heart palpitations, nervous attacks, loss of sleep, and even fainting. She can not go into the city for more than a”
  • Towers & siting: “rome" She can not be exposed to the field of cell phone towers WiFi or smart meters, because what happens is her nervous system”
  • Smart meters: “ton State and we paid the utility company to remove the smart meter because she couldn't sleep. We had the neighbors reduce their Wi”
  • Exposure limits & oversight: “pecifically for this reason. Until there are stricter regulations on the transmission power and pace of developing technology (mob”
  • Children & vulnerable groups: “ding exposure limits for the general public, especially children, women and hypersensitive people. We need a broad action plan fo”

Matched review of original text; attachments excluded. Review provenance

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. My partner suffers from "electro hypersensitivity syndrome" She can not be exposed to the field of cell phone towers WiFi or smart meters, because what happens is her nervous system locks up and she can (and does) experience heart palpitations, nervous attacks, loss of sleep, and even fainting. She can not go into the city for more than a couple of hours at a time. We have moved several times because of radiation fields or cell phone towers too close, and chose to live in a rural area far from development specifically for this reason. Until there are stricter regulations on the transmission power and pace of developing technology (mobile phones, Wi-Fi, smart meters, wireless infrastructure, wearable technologies, wireless medical devices, 5G, 6G, satellite communications, Internet of Things devices, smart homes, smart cities, autonomous vehicles, and other emerging technologies) I don't expect this to change. The 1996 radiofrequency limits are long outdated, and with more and more impact studies that have been done in the past three decades proving, not suggesting, biological harm, there needs to be much tighter regulation regarding the communications industry and the increasing “electro-smog” problem and the detrimental effects of short-term and long-term exposure to these fields. We used to be able to place the responsibility (though still unfairly) on the end consumer to know the risks of the technology they partake in, but no longer are people exposed to one or two electromagnetic fields at a time – we are now entering a time where people are often exposed to ten, twenty, even more fields at a given time, and often don't escape that exposure throughout the entire day. Given the breakneck speed of technological innovation and adoption in the past three decades, and those technologies should be held to a stricter standard in order to protect the health of the people who use them. Not everyone feels WiFi or cell tower radiofrequencies, though more and more do - and others, it has a destructive impact on their lives. We have friends who have kids with brain tumors from being near cell phone towers, and we have known so-called “antenna refugees,” hypersensitive to the frequency radiation. My partner, who is hypersensitive to EMF, had to move when there was a cell tower constructed nearby and saw significant health decline at that time, fourteen years ago. We bought a property in Washington State and we paid the utility company to remove the smart meter because she couldn't sleep. We had the neighbors reduce their WiFi signal because it gave us both headaches, and now AT&T wants to install a cell tower in our neighborhood which, if they do, will force us to sell our property and move again and find a new place free of signal which, in an increasingly electrified civilization and culture, is becoming more and more difficult to find. We need much stricter regulations regarding exposure limits for the general public, especially children, women and hypersensitive people. We need a broad action plan for keeping certain areas (“white-zones”) completely pure and clean of any EMF/electrosmog, where these people can go (without going into a fight-or-flight response or nervous system going haywire), and for minimizing exposure in residential areas. We need to stop blinding ourselves about the side effects of technology for the sake of the GDP and to reconsider the health of the people. We need change. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you. E