HHS-OASH-2026-0397-3872
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/HHS-OASH-2026-0397-3872

Personal Testimony and Call for Research and Protection for People Reporting Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)

Public Comment — HHS-OASH-2026-0397

To the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,

I live in Israel and have practiced complementary and integrative healthcare for approximately 28 years. I write both as a practitioner and as someone whose life was profoundly changed by a severe health crisis that I attribute to prolonged, cumulative exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF).

For years, my symptoms were mild and seemed insignificant. Then, within a few months, my health deteriorated rapidly. I experienced weakness, a choking sensation, elevated blood glucose, and other unexplained symptoms. As my condition worsened, I began noticing a recurring association between EMF exposure and my symptoms.

I describe this through the “bucket theory”: drops accumulate unnoticed for years until the bucket overflows. For me, symptoms then appeared in an unbearable cascade, like a house of cards collapsing. During this crisis, I also developed severe multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS).

About five years ago, the crisis affected multiple body systems. Alongside severe symptoms, I experienced measurable physiological changes: increased blood glucose, hemoglobin (Hb), blood pressure, and heart rate.

My recovery continues today. My quality of life, daily functioning, and freedom of movement remain severely restricted. Ordinary activities require planning, environmental adjustments, and major sacrifices.

From my own experience, the exposure–symptom connection is clear to me. I recognize that a causal relationship is not established scientific consensus. This gap between patients’ experiences and established knowledge makes rigorous, independent research open to new findings essential.

People reporting EHS often describe similar experiences despite diverse symptoms. Reported responses may differ by frequency, exposure type, and over time. These patterns deserve investigation.

I urge HHS to take the following steps:

1. Expand existing research: Support independent genetic, physiological, clinical, and epidemiological studies, collaborating with EHS researchers in Europe and elsewhere.

2. Investigate biomarkers: Examine and replicate findings concerning the nervous system, inflammation, and possible myelin damage, alongside blood markers, heart rate, blood pressure, and autonomic function. Identify reliable indicators and potential patient subgroups.

3. Study individual susceptibility: Investigate genetic and physiological differences that might explain reported reactions at exposures below current limits.

4. Reassess exposure standards: Study possible non-thermal effects and prolonged, combined exposure from multiple sources.

5. Review mobile-phone emissions and inform the public: In independent measurements I conducted about five years ago, I recorded 50–70 mW/m² near my phone. Today, during calls on that same phone, I measure pulses of 150–300 mW/m², peaks exceeding 1,800 mW/m², and readings above 2,000 mW/m² near newer smartphones, under broadly similar conditions. The 2012 BioInitiative Report discusses reported biological effects at 0.03 mW/m². These observations warrant investigating changes in exposure over time, reviewing standards, transparently informing the public, and developing safer communication technologies.

Reference: BioInitiative Report (2012), Conclusions: https://bioinitiative.org/conclusions/

6. Reduce environmental exposure and protect basic rights: Reconsider antenna deployment, including relocating transmitters away from residential areas, reducing small-cell and 5G installations, and promoting wired communication. Evaluate public warnings about mobile phones and other wireless technologies. Establish dedicated recovery spaces with electromagnetic exposure as close to zero as technically possible, minimizing both radiofrequency and power-frequency fields for people in severe health crises. Protect freedom of movement, health, and access to essential services, including for those who may develop sensitivity in the future.

7. Train healthcare professionals: Ensure respectful care, thorough medical evaluation, and support without dismissing patients’ symptoms.

8. Include people reporting EHS in research: Involve them in study design and research priorities.

Lack of scientific consensus about causation does not justify disregarding symptoms, physical findings, or the need for appropriate medical care and research.

I hope this initiative advances recognition, meaningful research, and practical solutions for people reporting EHS worldwide. I am willing to share my experience, provide relevant medical information confidentially with my consent, and participate in suitable studies.

Thank you for considering my testimony.