Cancer & tumors

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a healthcare professional, researcher. I have had over the last 30 years about 10 high level cases that required significant lifestyle changes. The most extreme are currently living offgrid with minimum electricity and it must be DC. Those that chose to stay in their homes restrict use of electricity with no wireless technologies. Over 90% of my patients showed some toxic response to EMF especially wireless. Most eliminated wifi and minimize cell use to emergencies. Symtoms included headaches, panic attacks, weight gain, metobolic syndrome into type 2 diabetes, muscular aches, weakened immune system, lowering of job performance and skin conditions such as moles and skin tabs. Having grown up in the 60's and 70's we saw the pollution, air and water, littering. Now the biggest pollution is the EMF Cloud! These invisible toxins are major contributors to the current mental wellfare crisis in this country as well as their continued inflamation leading to cancer and heart disease.

The Global Indoor Health Network is a 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to providing education and awareness of the health effects of mold and other indoor contaminants, including the harmful effects of microwave radiation. The use of EMF and RF devices is growing exponentially. These devices transmit wirelessly using Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) and Radio Frequencies (RF). They are NOT safe and are harmful to adults and children. The toxic nature of electromagnetic fields dangers comprising electrical voltages, radiofrequencies and microwaves is a clearly established fact in the international medical literature, that has accumulated over the last 250 years. Federal regulations protect the public only from the thermal (i.e., heating) risk due to short-term exposure to high intensity, cell tower radiation. The Federal regulations ignore the thousands of studies that find harmful bio-effects from long-term exposure to non-thermal levels of radiation. A good starting point for learning about the scientific literature on this subject is the October 4, 1971, report from Naval Medical Research Institute (NMRI), titled "Bibliography of Reported Biological Phenomena (Effects) and Clinics Manifestations Attributed to Microwave and Radiofrequency Radiation" (and also see the 1976 follow-up report that added seven supplements). The report lists numerous health effects caused by radiofrequency (RF) radiation and includes references to more than 2,300 published research papers on the biological responses to radiofrequency and microwave radiation. This tells you there were already more than 2,300 published research papers on this topic prior to 1971. Thousands of additional papers have been published over the past five decades. Barrier Trower, a retired British Secret Service Microwave Weapons specialist, summed it up, saying "By 1971, we knew everything that needed to be known." Another expert in this field, Jerry Flynn, is a retired Canadian Armed Forces captain with specialized training and 22 years of experience in Electronic Warfare and Signals Intelligence. Flynn has worked with U.S. and NATO armies in this specialized capacity. He said: “The U.S. military has known for decades that the RF/microwave frequencies most harmful to man are those within the band 900 MHz to 5 GHz. These frequencies penetrate all organs of the body, thus putting all human organ systems at risk. Smart meters emit these precise frequencies which, when combined with certain pulsed modulation characteristics and power densities, are most harmful to the brain, central nervous system, immune system, and can cause cancers. This is precisely why these frequencies are used in microwave weapons of war.” Dr. Devra Davis states in her book "Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, "there is a growing body of evidence surrounding alarming new scientific understandings of cell phones, other commonly used microwave radiating devices, and the new 5G network currently being built-out nationwide. We don't want to believe our new toys to which we are so attached--and which bring in enormous profits--could also cause our demise or that of our children. But science is not about belief. Governments' responsibility to their citizens should not be either." In relation to the harm being done by these devices, it is important to mention Havana Syndrome. As you know, a phenomenon called "Havana Syndrome" has affected many CIA agents, Embassy workers and American citizens. It is believed to be caused by microwave radiation attacks, most likely using cell phones or cell towers which can be used to target high levels of microwave radiation -- aimed at individual people or individual locations. It is believed that government officials were targeting opponents of the smart grid and 5G network with significant increases of microwave radiation. Another good resource is the paper titled "Electromagnetic Fields Disease" by Dr. Carlos Sosa and Dr. Pedro Sierra. This paper provides an overview of the history of this topic, in addition to discussions about pathophysiology, diagnosis, epidemiology and treatment. For additional information and find links to scientific research papers (including a link to the 11,000 pages of evidence that was submitted in the landmark case against the FCC), go to our website globalindoorhealthnetwork.com.

Hi everybody however i live in Belgium I did esoteric research. 5G ans wifi disturbing our immune system in some kind of way You can't imaged how this works. 5G and wifi are static second dimensional energy and disturbs our 3th dimensional energy which we called as aura. Problems in the psyche opens gaps or are even knowledgeable in joints who reacts because of these psyche. It is known that mental disease people often have also physical problems. By tuneforks i am able to release the sec dimensional energy of the human aura. The most remarkable issue: the person whose undergoes this kind of treatment is remembering their own psychic problem which is for me the proof that 5G and wifi brings problems and can occur cancers. Please if you know more or are interesting in it let me know by email.

I live in Slovenia, about 90 meters from cell towers. I am unvaccinated and have not had COVID-19. My health issues began with 4G deployment (shoulder calcifications) and exploded with 5G. Symptoms include brain fog, poor concentration and memory, ear pain, insomnia, extreme fatigue, and joint pain. Symptoms disappear when changing locations. Replacing our modem worsened ear pain. Turning off home Wi-Fi 3 years ago eliminated frequent colds/coughing and reduced some symptoms, though fatigue and cognitive issues persist. I now use my mobile phone only for SMS. In enclosed spaces, especially modern cars (with GPS, built-in SIMs, radar, and sensors), reactions occur in 100% of cases. Phone calls or active wireless in cars cause severe pressure, breathing difficulty, voice distortion, and panic/suffocation, forcing me to open windows. Talking on the phone for 10 minutes distorts my voice and causes flu-like symptoms for a week. Strong Wi-Fi exposure triggers insomnia, sore throat, and respiratory symptoms. I attribute these reactions to EMF/high-frequency disruptions of oxygen transport: Tissue Hypoxia: Deprivation of adequate oxygen to cells. Rouleaux Effect / Red Blood Cell Agglutination: Red blood cells stacking due to charge changes, impairing capillary flow and oxygen delivery. Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS): EMF-triggered vascular constriction and air deprivation. After installing a rooftop solar inverter, holding a wired mouse caused pain/electrical sensations despite all wireless being off. Measurements confirmed "dirty electricity" from the inverter converting DC to AC, creating voltage spikes across unshielded house wiring. A dirty electricity meter showed ~1900 mV (safe limit: 50 mV). We are currently awaiting active/passive filters. My body acts as a sensor without needing instruments. Health issues affect my family too: my husband has tinnitus. Of our three children, the two who attended school near broadcast antennas have issues: one has hearing loss (also used a baby monitor), and the other has tremors. Both were exposed 24/7. Our third child, who attended a different school, shows no symptoms. Following 5G deployment, health problems appeared across our neighborhood among both vaccinated and unvaccinated, young and old (e.g., heart arrhythmia in an unvaccinated neighbor, high blood pressure in a 17-year-old). Most neighbors now have high blood pressure, with several recent sudden cardiac deaths and cancer cases. Unprotected exposure, especially for children, risks an explosion of chronic illness and cognitive decline.

Across the nation many residents are concerned about the small cell wireless antennas being deployed in our community. These powerful antennas, part of the next generation of wireless technology (5G), are being placed in close proximity to our homes, schools and other places where we engage in the activities of our daily lives, even though there is no science that assures their safety. This is an undeniable risk. The rapid rollout of the next generation in wireless communications known as “5G." In neighborhoods like ours across America, so-called “small cell” antennas need to be installed close to homes and apartments to facilitate this new technology. The deployment raises serious issues that should concern everyone in our community: safety, security, privacy, property values and health. The FCC’s human exposure guidelines for the radio frequency (RF) microwave radiation used for this technology are decades out of date and the agency has dismissed the results of decade-long research on RF microwave radiation and human health completed last year by the National Toxicology Program that showed “clear evidence of carcinogenicity.” Because the health and safety of our families is at stake, we demand a moratorium on further deployment of 5G until it can be proven safe. NOTE: This is a security and privacy issue. Wireless networks are relatively easy to hack compared to fiber-optic wired networks. Data from your phone and other wireless personal or home devices can be easily captured and marketed. In addition, small cell installations have the capacity to house cameras for facial recognition, as they do in China. What guarantees do we have that the technology will not be abused? This is a safety issue. Local zoning codes are meant to protect our safety, but the wireless industry is fighting those codes. Most existing utility poles (the preferred location for small cell antennas because it’s cheap) were not designed to withstand the hundreds of pounds of additional equipment, and severe weather events could bring down the poles, causing damage to our homes and property. Our local officials should have the right to decide where those new antennas and their equipment are placed. But perhaps most troubling is the news about our health. A recent (2018) peer-reviewed study by the National Toxicology Program of the National Institutes of Health – the most prestigious health research organization in the world – proved that exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation, the kind emitted from all wireless devices and their infrastructure, causes cancer and DNA damage. Not maybe. Their language says there was “clear evidence of carcinogenicity.” We urge you to visit www.AmericansForResponsibleTech.org to learn more about these issues and what you can do to protect your home and family.

Increased cancer risk to people living around high power voltage lines, and cell towers. Drier skin, rashes, cancer. Big cities experience wave consolidation, where multiple 4/5G up to 71GHz consolidate and create locations where power can be increased many times over. In some cases you can even power a lightbulb over the air, and metal objects may appear magnetized, electro-staticity also increases. Same effects can be seen on IT workers within datacenters. Often just walking by server exhaust they may become electro-static charged, they experience dry skin, and rashes.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am responding from the perspective of a VICTIM AND RESEARCHER. Due to my experience with Cognitive Electronic Warfare and Counter Insurgency methods and tactics; I have created the non profit Human Free Will @ humanfreewill.org. EVERY MORNING and EVERY NIGHT I have to sleep within an Electromagnetic Field generated EVERYWHERE I GO with PNT (Precision Navigation Timing) infrastructure. I'm in New York City so when they covertly place an Electronic Warfare generator in close quarters it affects multiple people. My father and several neighbors have passed away recently due to constant EMF, RF, and Wireless Radiation Exposure in which I have attached a picture. My mother has cancer and I have brain cancer. There is NO ONE TO GO TO for the removal of the generator you can hear buzzing next door since it is "used for training". I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

See attached file(s) Scientific studies have conclusively proven that artificial light exposure, particularly fluorescent and LED light exposure: 1) shortens lifespan, 2) causes cancer and cardiovascular disease, 3) elevates one's levels of cortisol and ACTH to "stress-like" levels, and 4) causes other serious health problems. My attached "Replace Toxic Fluorescent Light with Natural Light Now!" article explains why such artificial lighting--lighting that no terrestrial life form, including humans, evolved under--must be avoided, and especially must NOT be used in settings, such as schools, where children are present. The article shows how in one experiment mice, which are mammals just like humans, who were exposed to fluorescent light lived only HALF AS LONG as mice who were exposed to daylight! In another experiment conducted by Hollwich and Dieckhues, and published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal, Ophthalmologica, experimental subjects exposed to fluorescent light for several days saw their stress hormones--ACTH and cortisol--rise alarmingly high to "stress-like" levels, but then return to normal levels after the fluorescent light exposure was stopped and was replaced with daylight exposure for several days. Hollwich and Dieckhues were so concerned over this finding that they remarked that the fluorescent light exposure explains the agitated mental state that school children in classrooms lit by fluorescent light develop. School children who are agitated are much more likely to misbehave, and the misbehavior problem is so great that the 600,000 school teachers who left the profession last year state that having to deal constantly with misbehaving students was the main reason for them quitting being a teacher. Meanwhile, although equally toxic LED light is slowly replacing fluorescent light in schools, still 78% of US educational institutions use fluorescent lighting as their classrooms' primary lighting source, and this harmful-to-health lighting also negatively impacts the ability of schoolchildren to focus and concentrate on their learning task--in short, it significantly lowers their academic performance level. This was proven by the attached "Daylighting in Schools" study, a study costing over $1 million that was sponsored by the California Public Utilities Commission. This study's researchers compared the learning rate for Reading and Math for elementary school students who were either in classrooms lit by fluorescent light or in classrooms lit by daylight. The classrooms whose primary lighting source was daylight usually had the natural daylight delivered into the classroom via a diffused lens skylight (called Skylight Type A in the study; see page 10 for a photo of this diffused lens skylight) and/or more regular windows. A diffused lens skylight is common, spreads the natural light evenly throughout the classroom (not as a solid beam of light) and is just a normal skylight installation job. Dimming louvers are usually included with such a skylight, in case the teacher wishes to darken the classroom for some reason, such as to show the students a movie. Now, here is what the Director of HHS and the President need to understand. On page 12 of the study the researchers reported that STUDENTS IN CLASSROOMS WHERE DAYLIGHT WAS THE CLASSROOMS' PRIMARY LIGHTING SOURCE LEARNED THEIR READING AND MATH CURRICULUM 20-26% FASTER than students stuck in the classrooms lit by fluorescent light. Even though fluorescent light uses much less electricity than incandescent lighting, still its electricity use is not insignificant, as 30% of a school's electricity usage is devoted to lighting. However, for a classroom whose primary lighting source is daylight, it will see the lighting portion of its electricity bill be ZERO DOLLARS on most days, which will be the case especially for the large percentage of classrooms located in the Sunbelt states in the US. The solution to the problem of our nation's public schoolchildren having their mental and physical health, and academic performance level, significantly harmed by minute-after-minute, hour-after-hour exposure each school day to artificial light is simple. The attached "School Classroom Natural Light Act of 2026" describes the law or President Executive Order that could end the disastrous classroom learning environment that our nation's public schoolchildren and teachers have had to somehow survive for way too long. Please see to it that this comment of mine and its attachments are brought to the attention of the Director of HHS and the President.

**Title:** Challenging the Consensus: Occupational EMF Exposure and Firefighter Wellness  Challenging widely accepted perspectives is never easy. In the mid-19th century, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis discovered that childbed fever deaths plummeted from 18% to 1% simply by requiring doctors to wash their hands after autopsies. Yet, the medical community resisted his findings for decades, discrediting him until he died in an asylum. It took generations for Body Substance Isolation (BSI) to become universally accepted.  In 2026, challenging the consensus remains difficult. One critical topic is electromagnetic field (EMF) and radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure and its detrimental health effects on firefighters and the general public. Because of the unique infrastructure of fire stations and the nature of the job, firefighters are chronically exposed to higher levels of EMFs from communication systems, station wiring, and nearby cell towers. Research suggests this long-term exposure may be linked to increased risks of mental health disorders, cardiovascular disease, and cancer.  The historical connection between electrification and health dates back to 1869, when Dr. George Miller Beard documented "Neurasthenia" (weak nerves), noting symptoms like fatigue, headaches, and heart palpitations. Beard observed that it primarily affected the educated classes—who, at the brink of the second industrial revolution, were the only ones with widespread access to electricity. In 1894, Sigmund Freud catalyzed a shift that reclassified these symptoms as psychological "anxiety neurosis," causing the medical community to treat it as an inherent human condition rather than an environmental issue. While Western psychiatry dropped the diagnosis, Asia and Eastern Europe never adopted Freud’s reclassification; neurasthenia remains frequently diagnosed there today as a sign of chronic environmental toxicity. Firefighters frequently experience these exact symptoms, often dismissing them as standard shift-work burnout.  Cancer is the third leading cause of death among firefighters. In 2009, Dr. Samuel Milham, author of *Dirty Electricity*, found that firefighters face elevated risks for various cancers, including leukemia, lymphoma, melanoma, and prostate cancer. Notably, respiratory cancers were not disproportionately elevated despite regular exposure to smoke. This discrepancy strongly points to alternative carcinogens, such as chronic EMF exposure from communication devices and station infrastructure.  Current human safety limits fail to protect first responders. There are two distinct categories of safety metrics: one for electronics and one for humans. Electronics standards are based on the principle of interference—recognizing that even a weak wireless signal can disrupt a device. Conversely, human standards set by the FCC and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) are strictly thermal. They only protect against acute tissue heating. This completely ignores the reality that our bodies operate on complex bioelectrical cell communication, leaving us completely unprotected against non-thermal biological interference.  Change is urgently needed. In 2021, the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that the FCC's existing RF safety standards were "arbitrary and capricious," mandating the agency to provide scientific justification for its extraordinarily high limits. Years later, the FCC has failed to adequately address this mandate, while telecom infrastructure continues to expand near fire stations, schools, and neighborhoods.  Immediate, practical solutions can be implemented at fire stations to create healthier environments. The most critical area to protect is the common sleeping dorm. Placing cell phones in airplane mode when turning in for the night drastically minimizes cumulative radiation exposure. Moving Wi-Fi routers out of sleeping quarters, removing unnecessary Bluetooth devices, and utilizing distance as a shield are vital first steps. Ultimately, we must operate under the Precautionary Principle: if an action or policy carries a suspected risk of severe harm to human health, protective measures must be enforced even if some cause-and-effect relationships are still being evaluated by the scientific mainstream.

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. I am the father of two kids: Joel seven and Bresly 12 years old. My wife and I din't know any better and we let our kids use their wireless devices as they wished, as a result: Joel, suffers a constellation of symptoms including lack of concentration, nose-bleeding,.....when we take him to doctors, they don't know how to diagnose or treat him. Bresly, at her young age is almost blind due to the excessive use of screens. And we are lucky because a neighbor next door has cancer!. Note: we live within 110 meters of two cell towers and the vegetation keeps dying and the birds don't come here to nest as before. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate expertise in medicine, biology, epidemiology, and public health, and the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected should be considered alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations, and establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding wireless radiation and public health. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.