AI summary & topic connections
The commenter requests updated RF limits, independent investigation of public symptom reports, real-world monitoring, and assessment before each wireless generation’s rollout. They propose studying efficient devices and satellite connectivity as potential lower-exposure alternatives, including their tradeoffs.
- Exposure limits & oversight: “Update the limits on modern science.”
- Research & federal duties: “fund independent studies, free of industry money”
- Satellite exposure: “Study satellite connectivity as a lower-exposure path.”
- Children & vulnerable groups: “special attention to children”
ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
Re: HHS-OASH-2026-0397, Request for Information on EMFs, RF Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure
Thank you for asking. Federal RF exposure limits date to 1996, and in 2021 the D.C. Circuit found the FCC had not adequately explained why it kept them. Since then wireless has moved from 3G to 4G to 5G, with 6G planned around 2030: more antennas, closer together, more of the time. It doesn't stop. HHS should give the public, and the FCC, a real health record to work from.
1. Update the limits on modern science. Revisit the 1996 limits using current research, with special attention to children and long-term, close-to-body exposure. HHS should lead the health review and hand the FCC a record that answers the court.
2. Take public reports seriously. Many Americans report real symptoms they connect to wireless exposure. Their experiences should not be dismissed simply because no one has funded a peer-reviewed study to examine them. Absence of funded research is not evidence of safety. HHS should collect these reports systematically and fund independent studies, free of industry money, designed to test them.
3. Review each generation before and after rollout. Every new wireless generation should get an exposure assessment before broad deployment and ongoing monitoring afterward, rather than riding on decades-old assumptions. As another commenter noted, most instruments were built to check heating limits, not to record everyday exposure continuously. HHS should fund continuous, real-world measurement where people live, work, and sleep.
4. Set device efficiency standards. For most people the closest source is their own phone. Push for standards that make phones and wearables connect at lower transmit power, whether to towers or satellites, and publish real-world exposure data for each model.
5. Study satellite connectivity as a lower-exposure path. Satellites with large antenna arrays, paired with more efficient phones, could cover rural and remote America with fewer towers near homes and schools. HHS should study this side by side with dense 5G and 6G networks, including the higher power phones may use to reach orbit, and communities should be able to choose it where it works.
6. Health comes first. More connectivity is not automatically progress. Faster video is not what stands between Americans and abundance; affordable energy, medicine, and housing are. Each new generation should show it is needed and safe before it is built into every neighborhood, and the burden of proof belongs on the deployers, not on families.
Please publish the underlying data and keep the review independent.
Alec Snelling
California
This comment was crafted with super intelligence (SI) support.
Discussion
Reader replies are separate from the official HHS submission. They are reviewed before publication. Display names are not verified.