AI summary & topic connections
The commenter requests unbiased HHS research into EMF, RF, wireless, and LED exposure, criticizing industry research and FCC oversight. They emphasize vulnerable populations, consumer warnings, cancer concerns, and environmental effects.
- Research & federal duties: “thorough unbiased study”
- Exposure limits & oversight: “responsibility to inform the consumer of possible safety risks”
- Children & vulnerable groups: “women, children, the aged”
- Cancer & tumors: “increase in cancers”
ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
The research regarding EMFs, RF radiation, wireless radiation exposure, and LED light is woefully inadequate. The studies done by the industries which have an interest in these radiations are biased towards the industries and do not properly study the effects of these radiations, particularly on susceptible populations including women, children, the aged, and those with medical disabilities, registered or otherwise. The FCC has been complicit in this, by its failure to act in a timely way. Please note the ruling in the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation in Briganti v. Apple , where the court ruled that adherence to technical safety limits does not void a company's responsibility to inform the consumer of possible safety risks. The DHHS should be conducting a thorough unbiased study of the effects of EMF, RF, Wireless Radiation Exposure, and LED exposure, given the extraordinary increase in cancers and numerous other diseases and syndromes in humans, environmental degradation, and the deterioration in the quality of life of the increasing number of people who cannot tolerate one or all of these environmental hazards.
Discussion
Reader replies are separate from the official HHS submission. They are reviewed before publication. Display names are not verified.