HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5445
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/HHS-OASH-2026-0397-5445

I am writing as a concerned parent and member of the public to urge the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a thorough, independent evaluation of the potential health effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), particularly radiofrequency (RF) radiation from wireless technologies.

I am concerned that current U.S. exposure standards may not adequately account for the full range of potential biological effects of RF radiation. Although non-ionizing radiation does not have the same properties as ionizing radiation, the absence of sufficient energy to directly ionize atoms does not, by itself, establish that all forms of non-ionizing exposure are biologically harmless. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate the full body of scientific literature, including research investigating potential effects beyond established thermal mechanisms, long-term exposure, and impacts on children.

I am also concerned about the influence of industry on the development of wireless safety standards and the independence of the regulatory process. I encourage HHS to examine the issues raised in Norm Alster's Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission Is Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates and to ensure that future assessments are transparent, scientifically rigorous, and free from undue industry influence. Safety standards should reflect an independent assessment of the evidence and be updated when warranted by new findings.

Other countries have adopted different approaches to wireless exposure limits and precautionary measures, particularly in settings involving children. I ask HHS to compare U.S. standards with international approaches, identify the scientific evidence underlying those differences, and explain whether research considered in other countries has been adequately evaluated in the United States. Particular attention should be given to evidence concerning children, long-term exposure, and the potential effects of cumulative or repeated exposure.

I also wish to share a personal observation as a parent. From a very young age, my daughter has repeatedly appeared noticeably flushed when near devices such as mobile phones and laptops for a period of time. I have observed this pattern over many years, and it concerns me that I have not received a satisfactory explanation for it. I recognize that an observation alone cannot establish the cause or mechanism of a physical reaction. Nevertheless, I believe experiences like this deserve careful, objective investigation rather than dismissal, and that further research is needed to understand whether any relationship exists between reported symptoms and RF/EMF exposure.

I urge HHS to apply a precautionary, public-health-centered approach while scientific uncertainties remain. This should include commissioning and supporting independent research, reviewing the adequacy of existing exposure standards, investigating potential effects on children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and making the scientific basis for its conclusions publicly accessible. Research priorities should include areas where evidence is conflicting, where significant knowledge gaps remain, and where existing standards may not fully address the questions raised by emerging research.

Technological progress and public health should not be treated as competing priorities. The public deserves confidence that wireless technologies are evaluated through an impartial, transparent, and comprehensive scientific process, and that economic interests do not take precedence over the protection of human health. I ask HHS to take these concerns seriously and to ensure that safety is demonstrated through rigorous evaluation rather than assumed in advance.