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 and concerned member of the public. Wireless radiation has affected me for the past five years when making a cellular call. I experience pain in my hands when using my cell phone when making a call. Also, in my town of Woodstock, the Connecticut Siting Council has approved two cellular communications towers of 150 feet. These towers are within 3 miles of each other. There are 7 other towers in our town along with many others in the adjacent towns. There are many studies that show harmful impact on both human and wildlife. 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. Carl P. Cecil Woodstock, CT – The Quiet Corner of Connecticut

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 and concerned member of the public. I have learned for years this affects us in ways we may not be aware of, from headaches to waves of public illness. I do my best to manage without going completely off grid. I turn my wyfi off at night, I wear an EMF harmonizing pendant. I am building a new house and have tracked where the cell phone towers are. There is only so much I can do but I am quite concerned. We really have no way to completely get away from the affects. 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 writing to give personal feedback to HHS on wireless radiation exposure. I am a concerned member of the public, an individual who has been labeled ‘a canary in the coal mines, and I react negatively around EMF and RL. When I look at a screen my eyes squint and start to burn and when I hold a cellphone in my hand, my arthritis flares up. When a smart meter was installed on the home of my sister in law, she started experiencing heart problems that went away when the meter was removed. It is time for the government to look at potential health effects on people and establish a priority to lower the radiation allowed in these products. Thank you for looking into this matter as the world is being blanketed with more and more unhealthy radiation and we the people are getting sicker from it. Diane

I am a concerned American citizen and mother and would love to update the wireless safety guidance and studies from the 90s when we had Internet and phone access through landline connections, flip phones and little no wireless radiation exposure. This is a constant concern for me and my children as their skulls are more permeable and they will be more impacted. It's a constant argument in our household since there is not enough information out there to confirm it's negative impact, we are too dependent on the convenience of wireless Internet and faster streaming. Please update the safety tests and guidelines to encompass the current 5&6G radiation plus overall 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 a parent, family and concerned member of the public. My children are exposed to wireless radiation all day while at school. They tell me how it gives them headaches and makes them tired. They come home to detox from it as we have no wireless internet and mobile phones are turned off at night. There are so many toxins that we are all exposed to and our buckets get full very quickly now. Wireless radiation is one of these toxins and because we can't see it people are not aware. The increases in cancer, mental disorders, ADHD, autism and more are from bombardment from all these toxins. And we are bombarded by wireless radiation all the time. There is no education on the effects of wireless radiation. People sleep with their phones on next to their bed and wifi systems on. There needs to be widespread education on how to properly use mobile phones and reduce wireless exposure. There should be laws against building homes and offices next to phone towers and phone towers being erected near schools. 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 concerned member of the public. I live in a condominium complex and my building has five attached units. Five out of the five units have residents who have been diagnosed with cancer, four with bladder cancer and one with lymphoma. We have had the water tested by the State DEP and the water shows no reasons for concern. There are, seven cell towers within three miles of our building, two of which are within less than one-half mile. 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.

To the Department of Health and Human Services: I am submitting this comment in response to the RFI on EMF/RF radiation and wireless exposure (FR Doc. 2026-19252). My perspective is that of an individual and a healthcare industry professional with a background in medical device and healthcare sales. I support HHS's decision to systematically re-evaluate the state of the science on RF/EMF exposure, including at levels below current federal limits, and I urge the Department to weigh the following evidence as it identifies research priorities: • In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization, classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as a Group 2B "possible human carcinogen" — the same category as lead and DDT — based on limited evidence from human and animal studies. • The National Toxicology Program's $30 million, decade-long study (final results published November 2018) found "clear evidence" that male rats exposed to high levels of RF radiation like that used in 2G/3G cell phones developed malignant heart schwannomas, with some evidence of tumors in the brain and adrenal gland as well. NTP's own scientists cautioned that whole-body, high-level rodent exposure doesn't map directly onto typical human cell phone use, but called the tumor link "real." • A separate, independent study by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy — the largest of its kind, involving 2,448 rats exposed over their full lifespans — found the same type of heart schwannoma in male rats exposed to RF levels representative of environmental cell-tower emissions, not just handset-level exposure. The researchers noted this reinforced the NTP findings using a different, lower-intensity exposure model. • Current FCC exposure limits, which the RFI itself notes, were largely set based on short-term thermal (heating) effects and have not been comprehensively updated to account for this newer body of long-term, non-thermal evidence. I recognize that federal agencies including FDA and WHO currently maintain that existing evidence does not establish RF exposure at regulated levels causes harm in humans, and that some researchers dispute the rodent-to-human relevance of the NTP and Ramazzini findings. That disagreement is exactly why this RFI matters: the existing evidence base is genuinely contested, not settled, and deserves a fresh, rigorous federal review rather than reliance on decades-old thermal-only standards. I would encourage HHS to: • Prioritize research on cumulative, long-term, non-thermal exposure, particularly for children and other potentially sensitive populations; • Commission an independent re-evaluation of whether current exposure standards adequately reflect the NTP and Ramazzini findings; • Ensure findings are coordinated across FDA, NIH, and CDC and translated into practical guidance for families, schools, and healthcare providers. My family has personally experienced health disruptions after being exposed to “healthy” levels. Thank you for undertaking this review and for the opportunity to comment.

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 grandparent and concerned member of the public. I have long been concerned with EMF radiation effects, especially for young children. I also have a friend with lyme disease who is extremely negatively affected by Wi Fi radiation. In most cases the effect is subtle but I’m very concerned about long term exposure especially from the 5G they’re using now. 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 researcher and concerned member of the public. From my research it is clear EMF, particularly non endogenous frequency EMF- non ionizing - interacts with Voltage gated calcium channels and other charged parts of our biochemistry and increases inflammation which can cause chronic disease as well as acute conditions. 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. I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. 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, 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.