Cancer & tumors

1) The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life by Arthur Firstenberg 2) Dirty Electricity. Electrification and the diseases of civilization by Samuel Milham, MD MPH. March 2010 Look up the terminology and warnings for LapTop. Was it designed for the lap? Or maybe it was just a cute name but really needed a wooden table top between the instrument and the body. How common is genital cancer from extensive (daily) use of computer work slates. What does the data say about genital cancer before the common era of computers for the lap? Another area of exposure is the smart meter. Has thought ever been given to what is on the other side of the wall that supports the utility meter? Would there be any concern if an infant's crib was adjacent to the meter? A homeowner could have their study directly inside with no barrier from the smart meter installation other than window glass, dry wall, framing. and sheetrock. A human being is on the other side of the wall sitting at his desk working daily for hours on his concerns. The smart meter was not on his radar. But we all have heard the drill...correlation is not causation.

I am writing regarding the FCC’s response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ remand concerning its decades-old radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure guidelines. The Court directed the FCC to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect humans against harmful effects of RF radiation unrelated to cancer. Specifically, the court required the FCC to address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure, the ubiquity of wireless devices and technological developments, impacts on the environment, and the adequacy of the FCC’s testing procedures for cell phones and other portable devices. The FCC should fully consider evidence and real-world experiences concerning the health and environmental impacts of wireless radiation, including non-cancer health effects, impacts on children, long-term and cumulative exposure, cancer, and impacts on wildlife and the environment. The FCC is not a health agency and does not have expertise in medicine, biology or public health. Yet, the agency continues to assert authority over RF exposure standards and is preparing to reach conclusions about whether its existing guidelines adequately protect the public. I urge the FCC to recognize the critical role of federal health agencies, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and to rely on appropriate health and biological expertise when addressing the issues identified by the court. This issue matters to me personally because: I am one of the approximately 20%+ people who can hear Rf radiation being put out by cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, smart meters, 5G, etc. Both the US Navy and Army have verified the fact that people can actually hear the buzzing of Rf radiation. My neighbor is a disabled Navy veteran due to his exposure to Rf radiation so this is NO MINOR issue. The buzzing of Rf radiation is not a benign sound. Rather it is a discordant sound in much the same way as nails crossing over a blackboard would be. However, each source, i.e. smart meters, cell towers, 5g, etc. all produce a different frequency and hence, a different discordant sounds. This sound is not only painful, but incredibly annoying and is present 24 hours per day. You need to consider that 20%+ of the population is being physically harassed by this discordant sound every single minute of every day. This is a significant part of the population. Because Rf radiation is being expanded all of the time, the pain and annoying sounds are only multiplied in intensity every day. It is not something I can escape as Rf radiation is everywhere. It causes me headaches, incredible piercing pain when smart meters link up, and interrupts my sleep every night. Rf radiation like all radiation is cumulative. Studies in Europe have shown that the closer to Rf radiation producers, they more prevalent the cases of cancer. Rf radiation has been proven to disrupt bees (which are responsible to pollinating the majority of our food) and birds. It has been proven to be dangerous to children, in vitro, the handicapped, and the elderly and is likely to lead to sterility in future generations. The FCC needs to give meaningful consideration to the experiences and evidence of the 20% of the population seriously harmed by Rf radiation before it and must fully address each of the issues identified by the court.

I was diagnosed with a benign brain tumor (Acoustic Neuroma) in 2015 and had surgery to remove the tumor that same year. I was told due to the size of the tumor I’d had it for roughly 10 years; this was from a world-renowned neurologist. In 2004 – 2005 I had a job where I was consistently on my cell phone, I would get earaches from being on the cell phone. My right-side ear would get hot and ache which I hadn’t experienced before or since. I didn’t think much of this until the neurologist said how long I’d had the tumor based on the size. I stopped using my cell phone other than texting and using the speaker phone since my surgery in 2015. I can’t say for certain that was the cause however the time frame was in line with my diagnosis.

I am very emf sensitive and at times can only lie down and try to sleep. Otherwise I get dizzy and even nauseous. The ringing sound in my ears I believe is the Frey effect as it changes depending on the day and amount of cloud cover. My husband died this year of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia- a type of lymphoma that began when our smart meter was installed. His head was literally on the other side of the wall of an old house that is made of lathe and plaster. I only draw inference from the experiences but I do think our regulatory agencies need to further investigate. Thank you.

Dear Mr. Kennedy, Firstly, I am writing to request that you move to legislate against Electrical Power Utilities being able to “dump” or move their data in the night, most frequently around 3AM. Smart meter data dumps cause citizens to wake up for what they think are unknown reasons in the middle of the night. The sleep disturbance/deprivation this is causing could be worth billions of dollars of untold economic productivity loss in our country. This could easily be remedied by legislating that the times be changed to moving the data at 10AM or 4PM in daytime. Secondly, I am requesting you pass laws to regulate kilohertz frequencies between 2-150 kHz via conducted emissions. There are currently NO governmental regulations for frequencies in this range. They are known as supraharmonic frequencies and are major contributors to chronic illnesses in our society. In other words, frequencies in this range are the most biologically active. They are also found as the data that rides on the carrier frequencies (aka subcarrier spacing) in 5G and cell phone communications. You could easily pass legislation forcing cell phone and cell tower manufacturers to use higher frequency ranges that do not have the same biological activity within humans. Besides damaging our electrical grid, supraharmonic frequencies are responsible for chronic diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. Unlike the traditional 60 Hz frequency that was once the only frequency traveling through the powerlines in the early 1900s, supraharmonic frequencies CAN pass through the human skin barrier, where they disrupt cellular and cell to cell communication. In summary, I am alerting you to these facts and calls to action: 1. Supraharmonics, aka radio frequencies between 2 and 150 kHz, are becoming more ubiquitous on our modern electrical power grids, due, in part, to devices such as smart meters. 2. These frequencies damage electrical devices and appliances. 3. There are no current United States government regulations surrounding exposure to or production of these frequencies. 4. Supraharmonic frequencies are deleterious to human health and could present a significant contribution to increased mortality and morbidity rates in the United States. 5. Regulation of these frequencies is paramount to protect human, animal, and plant populations worldwide. A detailed bibliography and more in depth article will be attached to this summary. Thank you for your attention in this matter, Paul Harding

Re: HHS-OASH-2026-0397 — EMF and Wireless Radiation Exposure To Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Thank you for examining EMF health effects. I write to you as a registered nurse with over 20 years of experience, a parent, an independent researcher, and a certified clinician in whole-food nutrition. My priorities are preventing disease, protecting all ages and future generations, and preserving our environment. Expanding wireless infrastructure requires rigorous RF research, transparency, public participation, and enforceable safeguards. Questions 2–4: Observations I have personally become aware of an alarming increase in children being diagnosed with brain tumors. Research should routinely follow up on diagnoses of brain tumors, cancer, and infertility to assess and report relevant exposures, including pesticides, mold, and wireless networks or towers near homes, schools, and workplaces, while accounting for other possible causes. Questions 12–13: Research Please evaluate these studies: 1. Gautam et al., Andrology (online 2025; print 2026): Rats were assigned to control, sham-exposed, and exposed groups (six each). The exposed group received 35.5 GHz exposure for two hours daily for 60 days. Researchers reported reduced sperm count and viability, testicular tissue changes, increased lipid peroxidation, reduced antioxidant measures, and increased DNA damage by comet assay. Exposure intensity, absorbed dose, temperature control, and replication require careful evaluation. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40798928/ 2. Wang et al., Biology (2024): Mice exposed at 4.9 GHz and 50 W/m² for one hour daily for 35 days showed changes in 104 brain metabolites and 61 brain proteins, including glycerophospholipid metabolism. These demonstrate molecular differences under the experimental conditions. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39452115/ 3. Human brain-organoid study (2024): Human-derived brain organoids exposed to GSM at 1.84 GHz, approximately 2.1 V/m, for one hour daily for five days showed reduced expression of certain proliferation, cell-cycle, and cellular-activity genes during differentiation. Appearance and measured apoptosis/senescence genes did not significantly change but it was only done for one hour for 5 days. This supports further developmental research. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanpr.2024.1357649 Frequency, power density, SAR, modulation, duration, temperature, species, and whole-body versus localized exposure all matter. Questions 5, 7–11, 14–18: Safeguards I ask HHS, the FCC, and environmental agencies to: • Require public assessments of evidence, realistic exposure, research gaps, and safeguards before widespread deployment of materially new frequencies or exposure patterns. • Fund independent, preregistered research with sham controls, blinding, adequate samples, temperature monitoring, accurate dosimetry, and replication; include positive and null findings. • Compare 3G, 4G, 5G, and proposed 6G at comparable absorbed doses and under realistic conditions. • Prioritize developmental, reproductive, and long-term cancer research and validated human organoid models of brain, heart, liver, kidney, reproductive tissues, and placenta. • Require independent exposure assessments before and after major diagnosis’s, infrastructure changes, publicly reporting combined exposure and verifying high-traffic conditions. • Offer wired connections and reduce unnecessary wireless transmission and cell towers in schools, childcare, and healthcare settings. • Establish enforcement, reassessment, mitigation, and restriction criteria for exceeded limits or credible evidence of adverse effects. • Study pollinators, birds, wildlife, livestock, and plants under habitat-relevant exposures. Question 5: International examples France restricts fixed wireless-internet equipment in designated spaces for children under three and requires primary-school Wi-Fi to be disabled when not needed for education (legifrance.gouv.fr; ecologie.gouv.fr). Germany recommends wired connections and keeping access points away from prolonged-use areas (bfs.de). Switzerland combines precautionary requirements for certain fixed installations with national exposure monitoring (bafu.admin.ch). Please evaluate these approaches for the United States. We are called to care for the people, animals, and land God has entrusted to us. Technological progress must include responsible stewardship, independent science, and protection of health and wellbeing for present and future generations. God bless America and God bless our world with love, peace, and health. Dannin Grosso, RN, CCWFN

My name is Michele G. I have towers all over my neighborhood. More here than anywhere else in Buffalo ny and the suburbs where I live in the town of Hamburg NY. There is a tower at least every two miles. I have one down the street from me. I have had three cancers in the past five years. I was tested and they are not genetic. The radiation that comes off those towers are very strong. And I am not the only one here with cancer. Every other house someone has cancer. Birds have disappeared. And I get ringing in my ears quite a bit. We do not need these towers. I feel bad for the people that have them right over their heads. No one asked us to put the towers up. Seems just like spraying the skies. We are tired of this government doing what ever it pleases. Without our consent. They need to be taken down. The RADATION from just one tower is causing headaches and many other health issues. Thank you for letting me voice my concerns

Commprehensive Government Study of the Potential Health Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation and Wireless Technologies To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to respectfully request that the appropriate government health and public-safety agencies undertake, support, or commission a comprehensive, independent study of the potential long-term health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) and radiofrequency (RF) radiation from the many wireless technologies now used routinely by the public. Wireless technology has become an integral part of everyday life, and people may be exposed to multiple sources simultaneously and for extended periods. These sources include, but are not limited to: 5G and other cellular networks and infrastructure Cell phones and smartphones Wi-Fi and wireless internet routers Bluetooth devices Wireless earbuds and headphones Wearable wireless devices and smartwatches Wireless home and office equipment Cellular towers and small-cell installations Other consumer and telecommunications RF-emitting devices I recognize that there is substantial scientific research concerning RF and EMF exposure, and that regulatory agencies have established exposure limits based on currently available evidence. However, given the rapid expansion of wireless technologies and the increasing duration and complexity of everyday exposure, I believe it is appropriate for the government to periodically reassess the evidence using current technology, exposure patterns, and epidemiological data. I respectfully request that any such study examine, among other issues: Long-term population health effects of chronic exposure to RF and other relevant portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. Cumulative and combined exposure, including simultaneous exposure from cellular networks, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, phones, wireless earbuds, wearable devices, and other sources. 5G and newer wireless technologies, including whether differences in frequencies, modulation, signal characteristics, network architecture, and exposure patterns warrant additional research. Cell-phone use, including long-term and heavy-use patterns and exposure associated with devices held close to the body or head. Wireless earbuds and Bluetooth devices, particularly because some devices may be used for many hours each day and in close proximity to the head. Children and adolescents, including whether developing bodies or patterns of lifelong exposure warrant separate study. Potential neurological, cognitive, reproductive, developmental, cardiovascular, sleep-related, and other health outcomes, while distinguishing established evidence from preliminary or uncertain findings. Cancer and other long-latency outcomes, including sufficiently long-term epidemiological follow-up to identify effects that may not become apparent for many years. Individual susceptibility and exposure differences, including whether certain populations may experience different effects from comparable environmental exposures. Real-world exposure levels, rather than relying solely on theoretical or laboratory conditions, including measurements of aggregate exposure in homes, schools, workplaces, public transportation, and other environments. Adequacy of existing exposure standards, including whether current limits sufficiently account for chronic, low-level, cumulative, or simultaneous exposure from multiple technologies. Independent scientific review, with appropriate disclosure of funding sources, conflicts of interest, methodologies, raw data where possible, and the full range of relevant peer-reviewed evidence. I also request that the government make the findings of such research readily accessible to the public and clearly distinguish between findings that are well established, findings for which evidence remains mixed or uncertain, and questions requiring further investigation. This request is not based on an assumption that wireless technologies are harmful. Rather, it is a request for continued, independent, evidence-based surveillance and research as exposure patterns and technologies evolve. Given the widespread use of wireless devices and the potentially large population affected by any long-term health consequences, continued monitoring and rigorous research appear to be an important public-health responsibility. I respectfully ask that this request be forwarded to the appropriate federal and/or state agencies, scientific advisory bodies, and public-health authorities for consideration.

To the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: The work to understand the harmful effects of excessive electromagnetic fields and non-ionizing radiation has already been done.  The science is well established, and waiting for additional literature to be published is time wasted and more illness and deaths produced.  Feel free to contact me should you desire numerous citations from refereed, professional journals providing the evidence for immediate action. Here's just one systematic review to start from (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28213724/) or Neurol Sci. 2017 May;38(5):797-810.doi: 10.1007/s10072-017-2850-8. Epub 2017 Feb 17:  Title: Mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours: a systematic review of association between study quality, source of funding, and research outcomes. Conclusion:"for mobile phone use of 10 years or longer (or >1640 h), the overall result of the meta-analysis showed a significant 1.33 times increase in risk" with "Studies with higher quality showed a trend towards high risk of brain tumour, while lower quality showed a trend towards lower risk/protection."  In fact, I'm wondering why the U.S. government hasn't acted more quickly on addressing the issue, but then again, it has to deal with the massive influence of corporations demanding that nothing - including the public's health - get in the way of their profits.  In response to public alarm, the offending companies create pseudo-scientific "studies" of very low quality to confuse everyone and, in the short-term, it usually works. Meanwhile, people die unnecessarily.  Remember how long it took government to regulate tobacco, benzene, asbestos, PCBs, DES, SO2, TBT antifoulants and CFCs (to name a few)?   The answer is that it took government up to one-hundred years, in some instances, to act.  Historically, government has been economically conservative (on preserving profits) and sluggish on protecting the public: there's little to no use of the Precautionary Principle, merely "let's allow the private sector to do as they please and when the bodies start piling up and we get a lot of complaints we'll start looking into it. Again, the time to act to stop people from dying from brain tumors and other costly, nasty diseases was long before "yesterday" with regard to EMFs and non-ionizing radiation.  The work on legislation has already been done, as well.  Perhaps, start by considering the implementation of the European standard as set forth under Resolution 1815 (2011). Thank you for your consideration.

I’m not sure why but I can’t have my wifi on in the house at all. My heart starts having palpitations and I get very emotional. My last dream home I bought was a few feet away from a transmission line and from day one my whole body felt like it was getting shocked. It was a living nightmare. I somehow got through RN school sleeping in my car away from the house. Finally we moved to the country and I’m fine. I just can’t have the wifi on so it stays off when I’m here! My child’s brand new school is getting built and there is a cell tower right above it. Please make it mandatory all cell towers have to be removed from a child’s school or with in so many feet. We know they cause cancer already so what are we waiting for