Environmental effects

Aloha, I am a dog trainer and pet sitter. When I was in California by camp Pendleton ,I noticed that two dogs and the owner passed away from cancer within 3 years of moving there, when they were right next to a repeater. Now I moved to Kauai and the same thing happened in Kalaheo. On papalina and Kai Ikena. Within 3 years of moving there both the Doberman and the young Bernese mountain dog got cancer as well as the owner who is about 65. Myself, I have been deeply affected by emfs with tinnitus since 2011. The only time it goes away is if I am away from any towers or frequencies. Thank you very much. These things are very dangerous and it should not be happening against our Express permission.

I have learned that in order to sleep I need to turn off the Wifi at night. This means that when we travel I cannot stay in a hotel. I must choose a rental that will allow me to turn off the Wifi. I have tested this many times, which means many sleepless nights! Please take this issue seriously and study the true health and environmental effects of EMFs, RF, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. It is ridiculous to assume that these huge changes to our environment do not affect us, our children, and the animal kingdom in profound ways. This issue screams for rigorous scientific study!

As a retired educator, I am very interested and a bit concerned that more testing has not been done concerning EMF's and human health. Even plants die close to emf's. Human health has not improved with cell and computer use both physically and mentally. I am also aware of the response I have seen in student behavior and general health. More childhood cancers are becoming more prevalent. I encourage progress on the side of caution. Protect human health. No more profit over the people and the environment..

As someone whose health is negatively affected by wireless radiation, and having many friends similarly affected, I urge the HHC to study this issue as mandated by law, in order to stop the proliferation of wireless technology until more is known abt how to use & deploy it in a way that is less harmful to human health & the environment. Government agencies need to prioritize health and well-being for us and our planet, & stop being influenced by mega corporations whose main goal is profit. Thanks for your attention to this vital issue.

It is long past time to make sure that we are all protected from electromagnetic fields and wireless radiation. Many studies have been done that show the damage can be severe, especially for higher radiation levels such as 5G. The next generation that is being proposed, 6 G and higher, will be even worse. Some people are more seriously affected than others, but already it is hard for those most affected to find places where they can be comfortable. However, even those who are not aware of it are being affected. All these forms of radiation damage not only humans, but also domestic animals, wildlife, and even plants. It would be nice if industry was more capable of restraining itself or if education about the dangers wasn’t being smothered by monetary influences, but since that is not proving to be the case, we need laws and regulations to stop the increasing prevalence of radiation before we do further damage to ourselves and our planet.

LED lights, including LED headlights, impact my life when I’m driving at night in my older vehicle that does not have LED headlights, I get blinded. These headlights are extremely bright and disruptive to wildlife and their circadian rhythms. The Food and Drug Administration must comply with 21 U.S.C. 360ii to test and evaluate LED headlights for biological safety not only for humans but for wildlife as well.

I am a member of the public concerned with the unaddressed potential health and environmental risks of radiofrequency (RF) radiation from wireless infrastructure and devices. I have been reactive to wireless radiation and I urge you to review the scientific evidence in full. Accordingly, I strongly urge the Commission to, under the weight of the scientific evidence, find that the current RF exposure limits are insufficient to protect public health and the environment. They should be lowered to reflect the science previously disregarded by the Commission.

I am submitting this comment as an individual member of the public because I have personal concerns and experiences involving electromagnetic fields (EMF), radiofrequency (RF) radiation, wireless technology, and possible effects on health. For around five years, I have considered myself a so-called “targeted individual.” I believe I have been subjected to electromagnetic exposure that I associate with what I perceive as targeting, including exposure I believe may come from 5G infrastructure and satellites. I understand that I cannot independently prove the source of these exposures or establish that they are deliberately directed at me. I am asking HHS to investigate concerns like mine seriously rather than simply dismissing them. During this period I have experienced symptoms including skin rashes, dizziness, memory problems, difficulty sleeping, and problems with concentration. These experiences have affected my daily life. I have sought medical help and diagnosis, but I felt that the healthcare professionals I encountered were not sufficiently informed about possible electromagnetic exposure. I felt that some of the approaches taken did not address the concerns I was trying to explain. I have also used an RF meter in my home. I observed what appeared to me to be significant RF readings even when I was not aware of a nearby 5G tower and mainly knew of Wi-Fi or other wireless equipment in the area. I understand that a consumer RF meter reading alone cannot identify the exact source of a signal, determine whether an exposure is harmful, or prove that exposure caused a symptom. However, these observations made me concerned about how much wireless radiation people may actually encounter in their homes and local communities. I believe there needs to be more independent research into long-term and cumulative exposure to RF and EMF. Research should look at real-world exposure, including 5G, future 6G systems, Wi-Fi, satellites, smart meters, wireless medical devices, wearable technology, Internet of Things devices, smart homes, and other sources people encounter every day. I would like HHS and other relevant agencies to examine whether current exposure standards adequately reflect long-term, repeated, and combined exposure from many wireless sources. Exposure should also be measured in a consistent and transparent way so people can better understand what they are being exposed to in homes, workplaces, schools, and communities. I believe healthcare professionals should have access to balanced information about electromagnetic exposure. This information should clearly distinguish what is established, what remains uncertain, and how people reporting symptoms can be properly evaluated without automatically assuming that EMF exposure is either the cause or not the cause. I am also concerned about privacy and the possibility of unwanted surveillance or monitoring. I have concerns that government agencies or other organizations could potentially use technology in ways that people do not understand or consent to. I recognize that concerns about government surveillance are not the same as verified evidence that surveillance is occurring. I believe these issues should still be subject to appropriate legal safeguards, oversight, transparency, and independent investigation. I do not believe people who live peacefully and have committed no crime should be subjected to secret technological monitoring or interference. Government use of advanced technologies should have clear legal authority, meaningful oversight, accountability, and protections for individual privacy and civil rights. I also believe we should consider whether every new wireless technology is necessary and whether wired alternatives can be used where practical. People should have meaningful choices about how much wireless technology they use in their homes and workplaces. My concerns are not only about children. I believe the entire population deserves clear information about environmental exposure to RF and EMF. Research should also examine whether different groups may experience different levels of exposure or sensitivity. I would also like more research into possible environmental effects, including effects on wildlife and ecosystems, as wireless infrastructure continues to expand. Most importantly, I am asking for independent, transparent, long-term research. I am not asking HHS to accept my personal interpretation as established scientific fact. I am asking for my experience, and the experiences of other people reporting similar concerns, to be treated as information that can be investigated properly. The public deserves clear information about electromagnetic exposure, better ways to measure it, honest communication about uncertainty, stronger privacy protections, and research that is independent from commercial or other conflicts of interest. Thank you for providing members of the public with an opportunity to comment on this issue.

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 a senior citizen who is relatively informed about about these matters, but from the perspective of a concerned member of this world without a background in this field. Although I believe I have been adversely affected by these technologies, predominantly with chronic insomnia and a general feeling of malaise, I think my symptoms pale in comparison to many others. I have attended informational meetings and listened to people who were experiencing far more severe symptoms. One person had to move out of his apartment, struggled to find a suitable and affordable rental, and was staying with friends and family, which did not bring him relief. Parents were concerned for their children. My biggest concern is for the children, wildlife, and all sentient beings. These technologies are adversely impacting all creatures. Plus, the equipment and towers are an eyesore. The FCC doesn't seem to care and neither do most of our elected representatives. If they cared, they would take action and ameliorate the situation. 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.

I am concerned about the wireless non-ionizing radiation to which we are exposed 24 hours a day. This short-wave radiation is dangerous not only to our health, but to the health of almost all living organisms. We have not evolved to tolerate such an attack of these short-wave lengths on our bodies. The ill-effects of such exposure have been documented. They range from headaches, dizziness, sleeplessness, body aches and pains, mental distress, cancer and sometimes fatal reactions. Wildlife experience similar effects from bees and invertebates to vertebrates. The expansion of these cell towers and antennas makes it almost impossible to shield oneself from their damaging and dangerous effect. People have to abandon their homes, which cannot sold. Farm animals get very sick as well as wildlife. What is terrifying is the expansion to 6G. Children are even more vulnerable to the dangerous effects. What is the effect on a developing fetus? It is urgent that we have complete information on electromagnetic Fields, Radiofrequency, and Wireless Radiation. The 1996 legislation gave this industry indemnity from lawsuits. They cannot be sued for the harm they do. That inability to sue needs to be changed. The power to regulate this industry needs to be given to HHS and removed from FCC. They have proven themselves to be irresponsible and dangerous. We can switch to fiber optics and safer technologies. I appreciate your concern for our well-being and for the well-being of all life. We cannot survive without a working ecology.