{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-0366","number":"0366","name":"Jason Begalke","organization":"","posted":"2026-09-22T04:00Z","received":"2026-09-22T04:00Z","body":"SCIENCE SHOULD FOLLOW THE SIGNAL\n\nWe live in an electromagnetic universe. Every day, Earth receives signals from space, including radio waves from distant astronomical objects. We also use satellites, radar, telecommunications, Wi-Fi, and countless other technologies that rely on electromagnetic energy.\n\nThe answer to questions about electromagnetic fields (EMFs), radiofrequency (RF) radiation, and wireless exposure will not be found in fear, speculation, or political slogans. It will be found in good science.\n\nAs a healthcare professional, I strongly support HHS conducting a rigorous, independent, evidence-based review.\n\nWe should examine actual exposure levels, frequencies, power densities, duration, modulation, cumulative exposure, and potential biological effects. We should study long-term exposure, children, occupational risks, and emerging technologies. We should distinguish biological effects from demonstrated health hazards, correlation from causation, and plausible hypotheses from reproducible findings.\n\nWe should also acknowledge what remains uncertain.\n\nScience does not dismiss legitimate questions. It investigates them. Science does not manufacture certainty. It measures, tests, replicates, and challenges.\n\nWe should not fear the signal. We should understand it.\n\nI encourage researchers, physicians, engineers, and members of the public to submit credible evidence and clearly identified research gaps to HHS before the October 21, 2026, deadline.\n\nThe electromagnetic universe has been here far longer than we have. The least we can do is study it properly.\n\nRespectfully,\nDr. J. Begalke\n","attachments":[],"attachment_inventory":true,"withheld":false,"source":"https://www.regulations.gov/comment/HHS-OASH-2026-0397-0366","tags":["child-development","exposure-places","research-evidence"],"source_hash":"626f1ed2b5117e91f95954c59f6cd35b9fc338fdb827814f81dfd3b3fcf1da68","slug":"child-development-comment-0366","classification":{"id":"HHS-OASH-2026-0397-0366","body_sha256":"afaeaa4a8b99b0888ee48d85da5b59ad466510c1c3f98b95ad60a00f0f399bde","status":"ai_reviewed","primary_topic":"research","topics":[{"id":"research","evidence":"As a healthcare professional, I strongly support HHS conducting a rigorous, independent, evidence-based review."},{"id":"children","evidence":"We should study long-term exposure, children, occupational risks, and emerging technologies."},{"id":"occupational","evidence":"As a healthcare professional, I strongly support HHS conducting a rigorous, independent, evidence-based review."},{"id":"mechanisms","evidence":"We should examine actual exposure levels, frequencies, power densities, duration, modulation, cumulative exposure, and potential biological effects."}],"summary":"A healthcare professional calls for independent, reproducible research that measures actual exposure and distinguishes hypotheses and biological effects from demonstrated health hazards.","reviewed_at":"2026-09-22T14:53:58Z","review_method":"AI-assisted full comment-body review with exact source passages; September 22 CSV update","review_source_sha256":"7eccd3a666bda111ef0ea56f334756acf19f4ed2f907f5c986edbddb76270a24","source_url":"https://rfsafe.net/hhs-comments/data/catalog.json","scope":"Original comment body; attachments excluded"},"forum_topics":["research","children","occupational","mechanisms"],"primary_topic":"research","forum_title":"A healthcare professional calls for independent, reproducible research that measures actual exposure and …"}