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 patient. I have electro magnetic radiation syndrome (diagnosis code W90.0). I was intensely exposed seven years ago and have had to change entirely how I live my life. I have to live in a basement and the entire apartment is wired. I have limited access to public places, and can't be around very many people. I had to stay in a hospital and was very ill shortly after discharge. I am a ,ember of emrsyndrome.org, which has helped save my health greatly! I am hoping that HHS Kennedy's investigation will help save many lives! 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 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 concerned American citizen. I live close to 6 cell phone towers. I am worried about 6G and higher and how it affects our bodies and the birds and animals as well. I don't think there has been enough research done on this to date. 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. .

EMF POTENTIAL HARMS NEED IMMEDIATE STUDY 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 parent of three children who have grown up immersed in an increasingly wireless environment, with exposure to 5G and other sources of radiofrequency radiation becoming a routine part of daily life\. As a parent, I am concerned about what this continuous and expanding exposure may mean for my children and for future generations\. Unlike previous generations, children today are growing up surrounded by wireless devices, Wi\-Fi networks, cellular infrastructure, and increasingly widespread 5G technology from an early age\. This makes it especially important to understand the potential health implications of long\-term, cumulative exposure during childhood and adolescence\. My concerns are not based on a desire to draw conclusions beyond what the scientific evidence supports\. Rather, they come from the responsibility I feel as a parent to understand the potential risks associated with an environmental exposure that my children encounter every day and that is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid\. 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\. The experiences and concerns of individuals and families should be considered alongside the scientific evidence, particularly when evaluating long\-term exposure and potential effects on children\. I urge HHS to carefully evaluate the existing scientific evidence, investigate areas where important questions remain unanswered, identify gaps in current research, and give particular attention to children and other potentially vulnerable populations\. I also encourage HHS to establish appropriate federal research priorities regarding long\-term wireless radiation exposure, childhood exposure, cumulative exposure from multiple sources, and potential public\-health implications\. As a parent of three children growing up in a world increasingly saturated with wireless technology, I believe we have a responsibility to understand these exposures as thoroughly as possible rather than assuming that questions about their long\-term effects have been fully resolved\. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard and for considering these concerns as part of HHS’s evaluation of EMFs, RF radiation, and wireless radiation exposure\.

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 an individual who is highly sensitive to high levels of EMF. I lived in NYC beginning in 1995-2010, and during that time our society went from pay phones to cell phones and hardwired computers to WiFi. Around the increase of cell phones I began to develop migraines, and they only become worse as time went on. I tried to eliminate every possible trigger, but never considered EMF. In 2010 I then moved to North Africa where there was very little EMF around us - especially coming from the densely populated apartment and office buildings of NYC, and my migraines disappeared. I suddenly found myself sleeping better, no longer felt an ancy, irritated feeling within by body. I still did not attribute this to EMF. There were times that I then stepped back into high density EMF areas - airports, bigger cities, and I'd notice first the sense of agitation within my body and then migraines. It wasn't until 2017 when I moved back to the states and was once again surrounded by endless lists of possible WiFis to connect to just within my neighborhood that my migraines flared up with a vengeance. My body felt like it was in total overwhelm. We then moved out to a rural area where the EMF was minimal, and once again the migraines subsided. We turn our WiFi off each night, and nights that I forget my sleep is restless. I'm unable to visit my aunt and uncle in the 30 floor condo in FL because each time I go my body literally shuts down, as the density of EMF is too much. On a side note I've also noticed that on the rarest of occasions when I've put my phone near my ear to talk, I get a tingling sensation in my brain that lasts long after the call. Is there a chance that my symptoms are completely unrrelated to EMF? Absolutely. But we also don't know if they are not. we need more studies, we need to understand. 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.

My surgeon implanted a new pacemaker inside me in August 2025. Before the surgery, I had asked him if the pacer generated any radiation. He said no. Afterwards I learned that my new pacer contains a Bluetooth device that generates EMF throughout the day for warning signals. It also generates EMF for my pacer interrogations every 3 months. I was very concerned about this because I've read numerous medical articles that report a connection with EMF and cancer. I asked for the Bluetooth to be turned off. A representative from Medtronic, the manufacturer, said he could turn off all the Bluetooth warning signals but not the Bluetooth EMF emissions for the periodic interrogations. In addition, the EMF would last for 30 minutes AFTER each interrogation, or for 2 hours every year. I've read that EMF changes DNA in a cumulative way, so that suggests that the EMF, embedded in my tissue and above my left breast, could be increasing my risk for breast cancer. As a result, I have stopped my pacer interrogations as well as the warning signals. The surgeon told me that no research is intended for the Bluetooth device in new pacemakers. I thought this intention might suggest that the manufacturer was concerned that there could be a cancer link with the Bluetooth in its pacemakers.

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 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 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 parent. My own children are very much affected by EMF's as far as inability to sleep, temper tantrums, and defiance against doing their schoolwork. The current saturation of EMF's everywhere makes it impossible to prevent completely, despite using airplane mode at night and turning some appliances off. All home appliances now emit EMF"s of at least 150 to 500 V/m, with the washer and dryer emitting the highest EMF count of 450-500 V/m. 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.

Wireless radiation exposure has become an unavoidable part of daily life for my family and me. Cell phones, Wi‑Fi routers, Bluetooth devices, smart meters, and nearby cellular equipment all contribute to a constant background of radiofrequency exposure that previous generations did not experience at the same level. The hardest part is the uncertainty. Even when devices are operating within regulatory limits, it is difficult to know what long-term, cumulative exposure means for people who use wireless technology all day, every day—especially children, whose developing bodies and habits may lead to many more years of exposure. That uncertainty has made us more cautious about keeping phones away from the body when possible, not sleeping with devices near the bed, turning off unneeded wireless functions, and using wired connections when practical. I also have installed mitigative scalar technology called Blushield in my home to provide another level of protection within my home and from cell towers and neighborhood home nearby wifi radiofrequencies. But the sea of unseen radiofrequencies are ever expanding and a challenge to keep up with. The push for the 5G and future 6G along with smart meters planned for my home and community will make mitigation efforts less effective. This is not about rejecting technology. Wireless communication is useful and often necessary. But families deserve clear, independent research, honest risk communication, and sensible precautions that reduce unnecessary exposure without placing the entire burden on individuals.

The FCC RF safety guidelines should be updated to protect the public's health and safety as well as prevent the real potential for privacy infringement and sabotage of our nation's electricity and communications' grid. The current safety guidelines are based on inappropriate (thermal) data prior to 1996, before the explosion of wireless technology. It is unfathomable to me that our government has let slide these inaccurate/outdated guidelines from 1996, including the edict that communities could not use environmental or health harm to fight placement in our neighborhods. To me this is proof that the telecommunications industry knew back then of the harm this technology could cause. This law has been used to ignore information of harm, forcing neighborhoods to accept anytime/anywhere placement of increasingly powerful/harmful cell towers. We were promised wired fiber optic and, instead, were baited & then switched to wireless. I support HHS taking an active role in examining the potential health and environmental effects of wireless radiation. Questions about human health and environmental impact should be addressed by federal agencies with appropriate (non-industry, independent) 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. I am responding from the perspective of a [patient, parent, family member, caregiver, healthcare professional, researcher, advocate, concerned member of the public, or other]. 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.

My comment is very general in nature. Decisions, policies and laws made or administered by all three arms of government usually affect people on more than one level. Therefore more than one agency should have input. EG. Communications, justice, defense, energy, housing etc all affect health and so health experts need to be consulted not sidelined. Let's hope this leads to something positive and real and is not mere placation of those concerned, as I have seen happen many times before.