Describes prolonged illness following intense Wi-Fi exposure and recovery attributed to exposure reductio…

I am responding to items 2, 3, 5, and 5.o-p. Perspective Individual consumer and patient. Personal experience In summer 2012 I temporarily lived in a basement apartment where a large Wi-Fi panel serving the floors above was located in a closet. I collapsed with a 106 F flu-like illness, dizziness, severe head pain, and loss of appetite. An integrative physician treated it as a severe flu with high-dose vitamin C, chiropractic care, and acupuncture. After about five days of fever therapy the fever broke, but I then could not eat solid food without severe nausea. I returned to my regular apartment, which had far less Wi-Fi exposure. My physician diagnosed Lyme disease based on symptoms despite no known tick bite or rash and inconclusive testing. Over the next six years symptoms progressed (severe gut intolerance limited to meat only, fatigue, bone and muscle pain, head pain, dizziness, auditory hallucinations, tremors, seizures, catatonia, double vision, memory and speech problems, panic attacks, internal electrical-shock sensations, and progressive difficulty walking) despite multiple infusions, hyperbaric oxygen, and other integrative treatments. Following advice from Dr. Jack Kruse—remove home Wi-Fi, ground outdoors daily, watch sunrise, and receive natural light without glasses or contacts—the acute symptoms resolved on the first day. I regained the ability to eat normally, walk, and have energy. In the nine years since I have not relapsed. I use only wired connections, cellular (no Wi-Fi) on my phone, and prioritize outdoor device use, daily sunrise, grounding, and natural light. Limited Wi-Fi is now tolerable if I remediate promptly outdoors. The large Wi-Fi panel appears to have been a significant factor. Removing the exposure and restoring natural light and grounding produced lasting recovery that prior treatments had not. Exposure evaluation should begin with the frequencies human biology is adapted to. Earth's natural electromagnetic field is approximately 7.4-8.2 Hz. Non-native EMFs (nnEMFs) fall outside this range. Technology should either operate near these low frequencies or include safeguards against excess exposure. This is not opposition to progress; it is a call to design for biological compatibility. Fiber optics are often proposed as lower-exposure alternatives, yet emission concerns remain at attachment and conversion points. 5.o-p A key knowledge gap is the degree to which health depends on alignment with natural electromagnetic, light, and circadian cues. Most chronic illness can be framed as mitochondrial dysfunction. nnEMFs can impair mitochondrial function and desynchronize the circadian clock; a disrupted clock further harms mitochondria. Restoring circadian alignment (natural light timing, grounding, reduced nighttime artificial light and nnEMF exposure) supports recovery. Federal research and standards should treat biophysics and circadian biology as central variables in assessing real-world RF/EMF exposure. References Becker, Robert O. Cross Currents: The Perils of Electropollution, The Promise of Electromedicine (1990). Becker, Robert O., and Andrew A. Marino. Electromagnetism and Life (1982). Becker, Robert O., and Gary Selden. The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life (1985). These works on bioelectromagnetics and non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields informed this comment.