AI summary & topic connections

Describes a spouse’s documented reactions to wireless exposure, work and public-access restrictions and substantial mitigation costs, and requests biologically based limits, lower emissions and device off-switches.

  • Housing, work & access barriers: “she cannot work outside the house or be safe in public spaces”
  • Smart meters: “monthly utility fees to opt out of smart meters.”
  • Exposure limits & oversight: “base exposure caps on actual independent biological science.”
  • Li-Fi, fiber & alternatives: “manually modified or hardwired and RF/EMF safe.”

Matched review of original text; attachments excluded. Review provenance

ORIGINAL COMMENT · UNEDITED TEXT
Dear HHS, I am submitting to the docket and collection of information regarding the biological effects of Electromagnetic fields (EMF’s) and Radio Frequency (RF) and your question: Public Experiences and Reported Potential Adverse Health Effects. My wife suffers from medically documented biological impacts from wireless radiation and electromagnetic fields. I have watched her deal with physical symptoms every time she leaves our hardwired shielded home. The effects from the ever increasing wireless radiation in all environments, have literally turned our lives upside down. Exposure to cell signals, wireless products and infrastructure triggers immediate physical reactions and because of this she cannot work outside the house or be safe in public spaces, making basic errands and social outings very challenging and sometimes even impossible. To hlep mitigate this, we spend thousands of dollars out of pocket on specialized gear—such as shielding clothing, RF meters, protective sleeping canopies, and monthly utility fees to opt out of smart meters. Everything in our home and life including all new purchases have to be manually modified or hardwired and RF/EMF safe. This requires endless research and work just to maintain a safe living space. The science on the biological impacts of RF and EMF is clear; science, the government and the industry have known about the biological effects for decades, there are thousands of studies. Our allowable exposure levels here in the U.S are too high, several times higher than many other countries and it is time for our regulatory agencies, our legislators and telecom to take the steps to fully address our outdated emission standards, their biological impacts and to make our technology safer. This is an engineering, policy and willingness matter. The engineering solutions and ability exists, the industry is not going to take this turn towards instituting more safety unless they are required to by the federal government, Our regulatory agencies and our legislators simply have to be willing to move into meaningfully regulating this multi trillion dollar industry and driving economic engine, something that has not been done since the onset of the tech boom in the 1990s. With this investigation and the information you receive from it, along with the research you have had for decades, , you are in a position to make a change for millions of people here in the U.S and ultimately around the world. It is my hope that you will take all needed actions to bring forth the necessary changes that will ensure safer living with our technology for all. How many people have to suffer, lose their health or their lives- unnecessarily as we continue these known harmful practices and policies? How many lives have to be ruined before we say enough? As the department of HHS it is imperative that you take the steps to ensure that biological health is placed above what is convenient for corporations and their profits. You must make the investment now in making this technology safer in the many ways that we can. What We Are Asking For: Real Accountability: Regulatory bodies like the HHS, FDA, and FCC need to stop letting telecom interests dictate safety limits and base exposure caps on actual independent biological science. Practical Fixes: Devices should feature hard off-switches, lower default emissions, and strict caps aligned with human health rather than corporate convenience.

Attachments · 1

Original public attachments. Their contents are not included in the category review.