Research & federal duties

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 concerned member of the public. I support people affected by wireless radiation and I believe this problem will get worse going forward. I'm 64, and during my life I've seen an alarming increases in the use of wireless devices. Therefore, I have concerns surrounding the public’s ever-increasing exposures to RF radiation. Please thoroughly examine the evidence, and listen to people who report experiencing RF radiation-related health effects. 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 a physician, and I am sharing what happened to my husband Henry and me when we lived in a condo directly above a room containing 24 smart meters. We moved there because it was right next to my mother. We thought, wow, this is great. Within what I remember as a couple of months, I began seeing flashes of light across my field of vision. They lasted about 20 minutes at a time, and they were horrifying. I had no idea what was happening. Years later, I learned these episodes were called scotomas. Henry already had a history of heart problems. While we were living there, he developed AFib and was hospitalized for cardioversion. With both of these things happening, a friend suggested we have someone assess electromagnetic exposures in our condo. That was when we learned about the smart meters below us. The assessor’s July 30, 2016 report recorded radiofrequency peaks of 7,000 µW/m² at our living room couch and 5,300 µW/m² in Henry’s office. He reported detecting pulses from the smart meter room in the office. The report also identified other wireless sources in and around the condo. We moved out as quickly as we could and got a meter of our own. Ten years later, I still occasionally have those visual episodes. I cannot say from this assessment what caused Henry’s AFib or my symptoms. I can tell you when they appeared, what was measured in our home, and how deeply the experience affected us. Henry went on to earn three certifications through the Building Biology Institute and became an Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist. As a physician, I now care for patients who are sensitive to electromagnetic exposures. People can live directly above a bank of smart meters without even knowing it. We did. I hope HHS will study what exposure is like inside homes in that situation, especially over time, and take the experiences of the people living there seriously.

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 my own experience. Six months ago, I had been having trouble sleeping through the night. No matter what supplements or calming medicine I took, I would often wake up feeling very alert and I could lay there for hours trying to get back to sleep, and if I did it would only last about an hour and I would wake up again; I felt highly stimulated and could not relax - I could not figure out what was going on. This had been going on for many years. One of my physicians suggested that I might be sensitive to wireless radiation and suggested that I turn off the wireless at night. I began doing that and immediately I felt differently. I did not have that stimulated feeling (like I wanted to get up and move around). If I sleep anywhere where I cannot turn off the wireless, I have trouble relaxing and sleeping. As soon as I come home and turn off the wireless at night, I sleep well. I am not a scientific researcher, but I am well aware that there are many, many studies that prove that wireless radiation can adversely affect your health. We have so much chronic disease in this country and deep sleep is essential for good health - there are no exceptions to that. HHS should address this issue; they are very concerned about chronic health and I believe the wireless radiation is one more huge stress on the body that keeps the body from healing and good health. You cannot be healthy when you are constantly stimulated in "fight and flight" mode and can't get good sleep where your body repairs itself. 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. Those who profit from wireless radiation must not be allowed to harm the entire population. A physically sick society cannot create a healthy, thriving nation. It just won't happen. The government must understand that. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard.

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 patient's wife. My husband who has led a healthy lifestyle - not overweight, no smoking or drinking, dances twice a week, very active, got a malignant tumor at the top of his stomach about to enter the esophagus, so he just had his stomach removed, the protocol for this cancer. Why we suspect EMF...A year ago in July we had the wifi increased in our backhouse where my husband offices. He went to the doctor in August for his regular check up. All was well. THEN, 6 months later he has a tumor! A friend has a device that measures EMF and in front of his computer it registered off the charts. We moved some items to a more distant outlet and unplugged his computer and the device measured much lower. We cannot fathom another cause for this "out of the blue" tumor. He has now lost 20 pounds and can only eat small meals throughout the day. 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 a Wisconsin landowner and agricultural operator whose working farm is being considered for a proposed 765-kV extra-high-voltage transmission corridor. My attached comments address the need for updated federal research and guidance concerning long-term 60-Hz electric and magnetic field exposure, including residential, occupational, agricultural and livestock exposure. Please see my attached comment for my complete response.

See attached file(s) I am starting to draft an outline for a research project I want to undertake and the topics I would like to address. Since there is a deadline for submitting preliminary information on the subject, I am sending you this incomplete draft. It is a highly rigorous yet fascinating topic, given that the future of society will be shaped by technology. I hope you like it, and thank you.

This is personal and family related as well as science too. The Environmental Working Group has also put out a report on RF/EMF. EMF cause my ears to ring. If I walk closer to a router the sound gets louder and if I walk away it will decrease or go away if I am far enough away for long enough. They also give me sinus infections. If I sleep with EMF's I have sinus infections and if I tent in the woods away from EMF they go away. I have repeated this process several times. When they put a smart meter on our house my kids started having ticks a lot, serveral times a minute and when we called and opted out of the smart meter the ticks stopped. I had tight muscles when they installed the smart meter but that went away after they changed the meter. We did not repeat this process. I have also seen family members kids and babies that had OCD much worse with RF/EMF. When it was removed or reduced it got a lot better. I believe that mast cell activation from the RF/EMF could be one of the reason for this issue. As Far as solutions I would like to see building regulations changed so no plug-ins have to be installed in bedroom and Cell tower are placed at least half a mile from homes, churches, and schools. The EU estimates that 2 to 3 percent of people have EHS (electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome). They have limits and the right to have your work checked and for the employer to reduce exposer. RF/EMF cages and bags can be used in rooms and offices without stopping wifi but reducing how much RF/EMF a person gets. Public spaces should not have high levels of RF/EMF because you are limiting the public that is sensitive to those spaces. Opt-out should be a mandated by law. I am wanting to move to a new town but they have no opt-out. How are my kids going to live in a house with no opt-out? Also opt-out should not carry a extra fee as we had no smart meters for decades and had no extra fee so this seems like you are punishing those who are sensitive to this when they had no control over it. DOI: 10.1080/09553000500303518 DOI: 10.1556/ABiol.56.2005.1-2.5 DOI: 10.1002/bem.22219 DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113851

I would like to see a double blind, randomized, placebo clinical trial done by HHS concerning any amount of EMF and 5G AFTER 2018. I don’t believe one single study (a high validity trial) has ever been done. HHS has the funds to conduct such a study and if they believe in their own mission statement, one would surmise they would have done such a study already. Clearly, the Covid pandemic was a debaucle. HHS has a chance to redeem itself by doing legitimate quantitative and qualitative studies on the effects of EMF and 5G and 6G on the public. Thank you.

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 as a parent, individual consumer, and concerned resident of the North Houston, Texas, area. I do not have one specific diagnosed health event to report. My concern is the rapidly increasing, involuntary, and continuous nature of RF/EMF exposure in our communities—and the possibility of negative health effects developing over years of cumulative exposure. Our area has recently experienced the installation of thousands of new utility poles, along with additional cell extenders, small-cell equipment, and towers. Families are being surrounded by wireless infrastructure without meaningful notice, informed consent, health monitoring, or practical ways to avoid or reduce their exposure. I am especially troubled that cell towers have been placed at local fire stations. Firefighters already face significant occupational exposures from smoke, combustion byproducts, contaminated protective equipment, diesel exhaust, disrupted sleep, and chronic stress. They should not be subjected to another continuous environmental exposure where they work, eat, sleep, and recover. However, my concern is not limited to towers at fire stations. I want the cell towers, cell extenders, and small-cell equipment throughout our North Houston communities removed—not simply relocated from fire stations to another neighborhood. Moving this infrastructure closer to another family, school, childcare facility, workplace, or public space does not resolve the underlying concern. Reliable communication service is important, but I do not want perfect wireless coverage when it may come at the expense of our health. Faster speeds and uninterrupted connectivity should not automatically take priority over the well-being of children, families, first responders, and communities. Children are of particular concern because they are exposed from very young ages and may experience this exposure throughout their lives. Wireless signals now come from many sources simultaneously, including towers, small cells, Wi-Fi routers, phones, tablets, wearable devices, smart meters, appliances, vehicles, schools, and neighboring homes. Our bodies and nervous systems are given little meaningful break from this constant background exposure. I urge HHS to investigate potential negative health effects associated with long-term and cumulative RF/EMF exposure, including possible effects on sleep, neurological and autonomic nervous-system function, cognition, behavior, headaches, reproductive health, immune function, development, and cancer risk. The absence of an immediate or easily identifiable symptom should not be treated as proof that continuous lifetime exposure is harmless. Research and safety evaluations must reflect real-world conditions—not one device or frequency tested in isolation. Studies should examine continuous lifetime exposure, simultaneous exposure from multiple sources, pulsed and modulated signals, potential non-thermal biological effects, exposure during pregnancy and childhood, occupational exposure among firefighters, antenna density, and cumulative neighborhood exposure. This research should be conducted by independent experts in medicine, neurology, biology, epidemiology, pediatrics, reproductive health, occupational health, and public health, with strong safeguards against industry conflicts of interest. I am asking federal, state, and local authorities to stop further expansion of wireless towers and small-cell infrastructure in our communities and establish a process for removing the equipment already installed. Communities deserve clear disclosure, exposure measurements, meaningful authority over infrastructure placement, and access to safer wired alternatives. Technology should serve people without requiring constant and unavoidable exposure. We should not have to choose between participating in modern society and protecting our families’ health. Please place long-term human health ahead of convenience and ever-increasing wireless coverage.

https://www.emfdata.org/en/studies