All comment threads

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” which was released in July 2021 and concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. Radiofrequency radiation is emitted by cell towers. This review paper concludes that “Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC’s current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1).”

I am submitting this comment as a concerned member of the public urging HHS to undertake a comprehensive, independent investigation into the potential human and environmental health effects of the rapidly expanding electromagnetic environment created by modern technology. My concern is not based on the assumption that every wireless technology has been proven harmful. Rather, it is that society has dramatically increased the intensity, density, duration, proximity, and variety of electromagnetic exposures while the long-term biological consequences of this cumulative exposure remain incompletely understood. Today, people can be exposed simultaneously and continuously to Wi-Fi, 4G/5G and future 6G infrastructure, cell towers and small cells, Bluetooth and wireless headphones, smartphones, smart meters, wireless cameras and security systems, wearables, smart-home devices, connected and electric vehicles, wireless medical devices, satellite communications such as Starlink, and the rapidly expanding infrastructure supporting AI and data centers. The central question should therefore not simply be whether each individual device complies with an existing exposure limit. HHS should determine whether current standards adequately address real-world, cumulative, lifelong exposure from multiple sources operating simultaneously. I respectfully ask HHS to investigate potential effects on: sleep and circadian biology; hormonal and endocrine function; reproductive health and fertility; pregnancy and fetal development; neurological and cognitive function; immune and metabolic function; oxidative stress and cellular signaling; DNA integrity, repair and epigenetic processes; cancer and other chronic diseases; and children and other potentially vulnerable populations. Research should specifically examine effects that may occur below existing exposure limits and should evaluate frequency, power density, modulation, pulsing, duty cycle, beamforming, proximity to the body, duration, and simultaneous exposure to multiple frequencies. HHS itself identifies these factors as important areas for investigation. I am particularly concerned about involuntary residential exposure. Smart meters, nearby wireless infrastructure, small cells, and other continuously operating devices can expose people inside their own homes regardless of whether they personally choose to use wireless technology. Americans should have meaningful information and reasonable options for reducing unnecessary exposure in their homes, schools, workplaces, and communities. HHS should also investigate the rapidly changing exposure environment created by 5G, future 6G, satellite networks, IoT devices, autonomous vehicles, wireless charging, electric vehicles, smart cities, and other emerging technologies before assuming that older exposure research adequately represents these systems. The investigation should extend beyond human health. HHS should coordinate with appropriate federal agencies to examine potential effects on wildlife, birds, insects, pollinators, livestock, plants, and ecosystems. HHS specifically requests information concerning environmental effects and wireless infrastructure near homes, schools, childcare facilities, workplaces, and livestock. Independent research is essential. Federal research should be transparent, independently replicated, and protected from conflicts of interest. Long-term studies should measure actual exposure rather than relying solely on estimates of device use. The government should develop standardized methods for measuring individual and neighborhood exposure and consider longitudinal health studies, environmental monitoring, occupational monitoring, disease registries, biomonitoring, and adverse-event reporting. I also urge HHS to improve public transparency. Consumers, parents, schools, workers, and communities should have understandable information about the emissions and realistic exposure characteristics of wireless devices and infrastructure. The scientific evidence contains established findings, conflicting findings, emerging research, and significant uncertainty. That uncertainty is not a reason to dismiss public concern; it is a reason to investigate more rigorously. We should neither assume that modern wireless technology is harmless nor assume that every health problem attributed to EMF has been scientifically proven to be caused by EMF. We should measure the exposures, study the biology, monitor health outcomes over time, investigate potential risks, and make the evidence publicly available. The unprecedented proliferation of wireless and electrically powered technology should be matched by an equally serious commitment to understanding its long-term consequences for human health and the environment. I urge HHS to make cumulative, real-world EMF/RF exposure and its potential biological effects a significant federal research priority.

See attached file. It is absolutely amazing that HHS is compiling these long overdue comments. Thank you so much!!!

I have been dealing with EMF issues for 6 years now. I'm 76yrs old and have a 90 yr old husband that I have been trying to take care. There is so much to eexplain. But. Unfortunately I can't be on this cell phone long enough. But thank God your doing research. Maybe people like me will get some help with the EMF issues. I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy!

Comment on Docket HHS-OASH-2026-0397 Perspective (Q1): Individual / adult educator in a community Lifelong Learners setting. Not a physician. I teach practical exposure-reduction, not products. Q8 — What should be disclosed People need plain-language facts at the point of use: phones are radio transmitters; distance drops exposure sharply; night-time household wireless can be switched off; wearables and routers add to the load even when you are not “on a call.” Federal consumer and school guidance should say that in one page, without a store attached. Q10 — Sensitive populations Exposure assessment should treat children, pregnant women, and those with implants or unexplained symptoms as groups that may need extra caution while the science is incomplete — not as proof of a single disease. Schools and childcare should have the option of wired connections and phones stored off the body. Q11 — Evidence below current U.S. limits IARC classified RF electromagnetic fields as *possibly carcinogenic to humans* (Group 2B, 2011). The National Toxicology Program reported tumor findings in male rats after long-term RF exposure. The D.C. Circuit in *Environmental Health Trust v. FCC* (2021) found the FCC had not adequately explained its decision to retain 1996-era limits in light of subsequent evidence on children and long-term exposure. Those three items are enough to justify a current HHS evidence review. They are not, by themselves, a diagnosis of any person. Q15 — Research priorities Highest gaps: real-world *cumulative* exposure (phone + Wi-Fi + infrastructure), non-thermal biological endpoints, pediatric and in-utero cohorts, and independent replication of NTP-type work at current waveforms (including 5G). Coordination: NIH for biology, FDA for device emissions and labeling, CDC for school/community guidance. Practical recommendation While agencies update the science, HHS can publish the same three habits already used in many public-health pages: increase distance, take the phone off the body, turn household transmitters down or off at night. That does not require a new standard to be finished first. Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

I have been debilitated by 5G technology on several occasions. I was parked in Sausalito, California enjoying an ocean view at a park and ride when I suddenly could not think, it was as if I was in a stupor. My psychology was scrambled and nothing made sense in that moment. I had the presence of mind to get out of my car to get fresh air, and noticed there there were several towers, both 5G and cellular towers. I frequently see clients in their homes, and one client has a very powerful Xfinity modem. When I am in the room that has the modem, negative thoughts race through my mind, then my whole body heats up and it stays heated until I turn off the modem. When I drive on the 101 freeway and pass a 5G tower, I can feel prickly sensation on my skin in different parts of my body and it definately changes my psychology for the worst. There is no safety data for this technology, there will never be safety data because it has been proven over and over again that this technology is toxic to humans.

My dad ended up dying of brain cancer. He was left-handed and he got the brain tumor on the left side of his head near his ear where he held his cell phone and all of us are convinced that's why he got brain cancer. In many ways wireless radiation really ruined my life. I have MCS multiple chemical sensitivity and everybody like me has a lot of problems processing chemicals and a sensitivity to electromagnetism. Usually they display one of the two a little bit more than the other one, but both sensitivities are always both present and no one seams to knows why. I have to pick houses based on how far they are away from the cell towers. Trying to get at least 2 miles away is almost impossible now and I use this website called antennasearch.com to help me. I can't be in the room with wireless routers and I always plug in the ethernet of my computer to avoid Wi-Fi because it really hurts me. When I was younger, I didn't feel electromagnetism and slowly overtime It's become a huge problem in my life. I don't know if I just have heavy metal toxicity and it's resonating inside me or what happened. For all of human history humans were only exposed to background radiation and then we upped that by billions of times and expected that there was no consequence when there really was. The thermal threshold argument for wireless safety clearly doesn't apply to me because it ruined my life. In the future we can use quantum physics and entanglement to do all the things we're doing wirelessly but without the non-ionizing radiation that's hurting me so eventually we might grow out of this problem. I remember seeing people that were studying all of these worms underneath a giant leaf and how all 30 worms would curl and uncurl all together and the people studying it thought it was some mating ritual or some thing, but then they realized it was actually a radar tower and whenever it's spun around and was facing the worms from miles and miles away is when they all would curl up at the same time and then they would uncurl when the radar faced away from them as the radar dish turned around. Wireless technology creates a magical and convenient world, but unfortunately it comes with problems that nobody wants to acknowledge that eventually ruins your life like me or gives you brain cancer like my dad and kills you. Just because it's non-ionizing radiation doesn't mean that there isn't consequences from using it the way humans are and my life is proof of that. If we use quantum entanglement instead of non-ionizing radiation we can have infinite bandwidth at any distance and so the benefits of moving on from this technology to the next thing is really high. Just know that people with MCS multiple chemical sensitivity and electromagnetic sensitivity are not making this up in a psychosomatic way. In the real world people don't want to pretend that their life is ending. Their lifes are actually ending from the stimulus of chemicals and the stimulus of electromagnetism and society just pretends that they're making it up as if it's not true. We put cell towers on the sides of hospitals, churches, and schools, and this is a huge mistake. It's causing an invisible stress on the body and overtime it's destroying people at a massive scale. Society isn't going to give up the convenience and magic that comes with wireless technology so the answer is to just move to the next technology with quantum physics and entanglement. Using things like nitrogen vacancy nanodiamonds we can probably have room temperature quantum effects and changed the world forever starting in the next couple years. Here's my dad's obituary so you know I'm not lying... https://tucson.com/lifestyles/announcements/obituaries/article_231262e2-2d0e-11e9-ac12-c75c99f75ff8.html

I have a 5G tower placed near my home in the country 2 years ago and since then have developed random headaches and insomnia with no previous history of either. All health tests done render me healthy and doctors have no understanding of where these symptoms are coming from. Strangely, we go camping far north every end of summer for a couple of weeks with no towers anywhere and my symptoms are no longer. How can being in the vicinity of a 5G tower & having symptoms, and then being outside of any tower's reach which brings relief from said symptoms not induce inquiry? No type of technology is worth the degradation of even one life, but many lives are at risk because these towers are so numerous everywhere now. Are we as a country willing to say that we knew that people were being negatively affected and looked the other way? Wasn't it Theodore Roosevelt that said "The man who knows the truth and has the opportunity to tell it, but who nonetheless refuses to, is among the most shameful of all creatures' God forbid that we should ever become so lax as that." EMFs are damaging the cells of every body and no one can escape unscathed. So many things that happen in this world are out of our control, but this can be regulated and can be improved.