HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5637
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5637

I have experienced clear, reproducible adverse effects from RF, electric, and magnetic fields for over 10 years. For the past five years I have been able to document these effects with simultaneous RF measurements.One of the clearest examples occurred when our Starlink router automatically reset after an update and re-enabled its Wi-Fi radios (we normally run it on Ethernet only). Both my partner and I independently noticed increased irritability, poor sleep, heart palpitations, and inflammation. We did not initially realize the settings had changed. When we measured with a Safe and Sound Pro II meter (200 MHz–8 GHz), we found substantially elevated RF levels. Returning the router to Ethernet-only mode eliminated the symptoms. This sequence has repeated multiple times. Because the exposure change was objective, measurable, and unknown to us at the time symptoms appeared, it strongly indicates the effects are physiological rather than purely psychological.A similar pattern occurred when our HOA installed a public Wi-Fi network with a bridge antenna directed toward our home. The same cluster of symptoms returned. Temporary aluminum SCIF-grade shielding between us and the source reduced symptoms; subsequent deactivation of the device produced further improvement that correlated with a clear drop in measured RF levels. In our experience, levels above approximately 10 mW/m² produce noticeable symptoms.The symptoms themselves are not minor: heart palpitations, disrupted sleep, irritability, depression, increased anger, light-headedness, and reduced immune resilience. These meaningfully degrade quality of life. I am particularly concerned about people who experience these effects without knowing the cause. Persistent, unexplained physical discomfort of this type can contribute to severe distress and, in some individuals, elevated risk of suicidal ideation. This is a form of environmental exposure that is difficult to escape without specialized knowledge and resources that many people lack.Mechanistically, the work of Dr. Martin Pall provides a coherent, experimentally supported pathway. Non-thermal RF fields can activate voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs). Excess intracellular calcium then drives increased nitric oxide and peroxynitrite formation, generating oxidative stress capable of damaging DNA and disrupting normal cellular signaling. This mechanism is documented in the peer-reviewed literature (Pall, J Cell Mol Med, 2013; PMID 23802593) and is consistent with the broader body of studies showing oxidative stress and related biological changes at non-thermal exposure levels.RF is not the only relevant source. Wiring errors can produce elevated magnetic fields associated in some epidemiological literature with long-term cancer risk. High electric fields from unshielded wiring commonly disrupt sleep and can produce tinnitus-like symptoms. Many people report that properly grounded shielding (creating a low-field environment) produces a subjective sense of calm and “quiet.” Dirty electricity—high-frequency voltage transients from smart meters, solar inverters, and other switching devices—is another reported contributor; some individuals note symptom improvement after installation of whole-house filters.I urge attention to sources that individuals cannot readily control: smart meters, cellular infrastructure, and radar systems. These can affect entire buildings, schools, and communities. I also encourage coordination with cellular carriers, utilities, and relevant government contractors to reduce population-level exposures where feasible.Looking ahead, SpaceX and others are developing space-based direct-to-cell services. Frequency selection matters biologically; 2.4 GHz, for example, coincides with a resonant range used in microwave ovens and is known to interact strongly with biological systems. It would be valuable for government agencies to evaluate whether certain frequency bands produce measurably lower (or even negligible) biological disruption compared with currently dominant bands, especially for systems that irradiate large ground areas from above.In summary, a decade of personal observation, repeated objective measurements correlating with symptoms, and the existing scientific literature leave me convinced that current ambient EMF exposures produce adverse biological effects in at least a subset of the population. Reducing the most pervasive uncontrolled sources, improving public education on practical mitigation, identifying particularly susceptible groups, and incorporating biological considerations into spectrum and infrastructure decisions would meaningfully improve population health and well-being.

Key resources
EMF-Portal database: https://www.emf-portal.org/en
Research summaries compiled by Dr. Henry Lai / SaferEMR: https://www.saferemr.com/