Research & federal duties

I do not know if EMF radiation is really a health concern or not, but I want to know the facts. For too long, meaningful study of the subject has been delayed. It is time to take the blinders off, reveal the data, and make honest, best estimates of true health impacts. DHS needs to be on the side of the people, not the tech companies or the fear mongers. Just tell us the truth as best as can be done.

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, a healthcare professional and a concerned member of the public I have suffered for most of my life from recurrent ear and sinus infections, more recently from Eustachian tube dysfunction and impaired hearing. It has become abundantly clear to me that my hearing is affected and Eustachian tubes feel more blocked (possibly inflamed?) when Electromagnetic Radiation is strong or heavy such as near a WiFi router, a cell tower or if using a mobile phone. My ears heat up if a mobile phone is put to my ear, which is most distressing. At my home, my computer is hardwired to reduce the radiation and I never put a mobile phone near my head. I wholeheartedly 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 it is of utmost importance to consider the experiences of individuals and families who report being affected, alongside the scientific evidence. I urge HHS to evaluate these experiences and the scientific evidence carefully, 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 my personal perspective as well as that of a healthcare professional, and concerned member of the public. Wireless radiation has affected me outrageously. I can sense when we are in range of a 5G tower at about 1/2 mile because I get a debilitating headache immediately, like a vice grip at my temples. If I am driving, I have to focus desperately and usually end up nauseous for several minutes. This effect with 5G towers is consistent, and I could probably start gauging individual tower outputs by the severity of my physical response in the moment. Following the exposure, I am exhausted and left weak and slightly off balance. I struggle to go to work (and am blessed to be the owner so I can safely work at home where my exposure is much more limited). Even the home environment is a bit tricky sometimes and I will turn off the internet altogether when my husband isn’t around. Since the rollout of numerous 5G towers in our area in 2020, my health has been slowly declining and I am dealing with many other sensitivities that I feel is a result of my immune system being bombarded by wireless radiation. I escape to our remote cabin and can recover my brain and body in about a week, sleeping well, reduced inflammation, and no headaches. This is a clear comparison of my life with and without EMF radiation everywhere. I would rather live in the remote forest so I can feel alive again, but then I really miss my family, friends, employees and customers. Why should I have to live in isolation to be well mentally and physically? Please address this issue as a real health concern that can be truly debilitating for some if not most people. I should have a say in where those towers get placed, if at all, PERIOD. Put the brain trust to work designing materials and solutions that make this technology safe and allow all humans to reach their full potential as well as enjoying life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 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.

As a concerned citizen who seems to have been affected by EMFs, I support HHS taking an active role in examining its potential health and environmental consequences. . Questions about human health should be addressed by federal agencies that are not corrupt and that have 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. Since covid I do not really trust any government agency to work in the public interest. But, what the heck, give it a shot. No, not that kind of shot. 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, and as a retired Nurse Practitioner. I have been personally affected by 5G wireless radiation in my home, and it took me many months before I realized I was having symptoms resulting from my exposure to it. I began having vertigo, low grade nausea, and felt as if my balance was somehow off, often requiring me to spend a great deal of the time horizontal, the only thing that seemed to relieve these very uncomfortable symptoms. I also felt that I could not think clearly, a symptom often described as "brain fog." An alternative medical practitioner advised me that these symptoms could be related to EMF exposure, so I had our computers hardwired with ethernet cables, thus eliminating wireless exposure in our home. This almost immediately gave me relief from these symptoms, and we have continued to use ethernet exclusively in our home. We also placed a Faraday cage around our "Smart Meter", as we were unable to have this EMF transmitting device removed. This has essentially eliminated the problem. I support people affected by wireless radiation and believe HHS should address this issue, which I am certain affects a significant number of people. 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 because the United States needs to stop confusing regulatory compliance with proof of biological safety. A wireless device can “pass” an RF exposure test under specified laboratory conditions and still leave unanswered the real public-health question: what happens to living tissue after years or decades of real-world exposure? Real life does not resemble a single-device laboratory test. Children, adults and pets are surrounded by phones, Wi-Fi routers, tablets, laptops, Bluetooth devices, wearables, smart appliances and nearby antennas, often operating simultaneously and for many hours every day. Current standards do not adequately reflect chronic, cumulative, real-world exposure. Exposure changes with distance, signal strength, device position, frequency, modulation, data transmission and the number of sources present. Yet our regulatory framework has relied heavily on specific absorption rate and power-density limits rather than long-term biological monitoring of actual populations. The question should not simply be, “Does this device stay below a SAR limit?” It should be, “What happens biologically to cells, tissues, organs and developing nervous systems under realistic exposure conditions?” HHS should independently investigate oxidative stress, cellular signaling, DNA damage, reproductive effects, neurological effects, sleep, development, endocrine effects and cancer. Absence of substantial heating should never be treated as automatic proof that there are no biological effects. Children deserve special attention. They are not small adults. Their bodies and nervous systems are still developing, and today’s children may experience wireless exposure from infancy through an entire lifetime. Yet the long-term evidence for lifelong exposure beginning in childhood remains limited. That is a serious knowledge gap, not reassurance. Animals and the environment also deserve attention. Pets spend long periods inside homes near routers and wireless devices. Wildlife, insects, birds and plants are now exposed to an increasingly dense RF environment. The evidence is incomplete and sometimes inconsistent, but that is precisely why rigorous independent research is needed. The National Toxicology Program reported cancer findings in RF-exposed animals, including malignant heart schwannomas in male rats and some evidence of malignant gliomas. Human studies have produced mixed results. These differences should not be used to declare the issue settled in either direction. “Not conclusively proven harmful” is not the same thing as “proven safe.” The regulatory process itself also deserves scrutiny. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found that the FCC had not adequately explained why its RF exposure limits protected against harmful non-cancer effects and had not sufficiently addressed evidence involving long-term exposure, children and environmental effects. A communications regulator should not be the final authority on complex questions of toxicology, developmental biology, neurology and public health. Other countries have taken more precautionary approaches. Switzerland applies lower precautionary limits at certain sensitive locations, and France conducts post-market SAR testing of phones. The United States should not assume that decades-old limits remain adequate simply because they are familiar. HHS should establish a truly independent research program with transparent funding and strict conflict-of-interest protections. Research should examine chronic and cumulative exposure, multiple simultaneous sources, direct body contact, pregnancy, children, pets, vulnerable populations, modern 4G/5G/Wi-Fi technologies, and biological outcomes at the cellular, tissue, organ and whole-body levels. Public confidence cannot rest on assurances from agencies or industries. It must rest on independent science, transparent data, reproducible findings and standards that reflect how people actually live. A compliance test is not a safety study. HHS has an opportunity to replace assumptions with modern, real-world health research and to protect children, families, animals and the environment using evidence that reflects actual exposure.

I am responding to the HHS inquiry about non native emf exposure which is a major health concern. I am a doctor who had to give up a beautiful new office, and end my practice in medicine due to high Electro Magnetic exposure. An Intel company (century link) installed a residential hub next to my office. My walls were hot, vibrating, patients were dizzy, I suffered severe headaches, vomiting and dizziness until i collapsed. I thought I had a heart attack but apparently it was a racing heart that caused a spasm in my cardiac tissue. The pain surrounding my chest was sore to the touch. Being a doctor I stared to put things together. We had the office tested for electro magnetic stress and the meters screamed ! Every meter got maxed out. So I made the decision to leave my newly renovated office, of course not easy. I was harassed by the rental company, but when something like thins happen you don’t care. It was my life or an office. I choose my life. I was laughed at by the rental company, I was mocked by colleagues, but again I didn’t care, my life and the health of my patients was more important. I had to pay fees and forfeit my deposits, leave behind all my updates and even though I begged them not to rent the place again, they did! With no regard to my findings. These hubs should not be within 1000 feet of another business but in my case this residential hub with hundreds and hundreds of modems was just a Sheetrock away. Since this event I practiced from my home and eventually decided I wasn’t well enough to practice medicine at all anymore. I sold my home and have devoted all my time to study this new toxin. I choose to get out of the city and move to the mountains. I am healing and I am learning more about what a dangerous toxin non native EMFs are to our health, the planet, plants and animals. Electro magnetic stress can even make candles burn faster meaning something unfavorable has changed in the air. We have plenty of studies showing how these frequencies kill cells and make our mitochondria sick. We know it raises blood sugar, we know it can cause cancer. Why are we not doing anything about it? Because of who holds the money! There is also plenty of research that we can harmonize these energies, why not use good frequencies that can restore the body, bring peace and calm and even help plants grow! We know how to do this! Why is it not happening! We need to take a look at EMFs from lighting, towers, phones, computers, electronics, baby monitors, electric cars, Starlink, the golden dome ! Hello ! Soon there will be no place on earth to find sanctuary in nature. No corner to the earth left without these chaotic frequencies. Maybe under ground will be the only place left, I think our children are a big target and they suffer the most since their brain have no fully developed. We have so many odd things we see as doctors nowadays, so many toxins we breathe, drink, eat and are injected with. Now we have to worry about a toxin we can’t see, smell or hear. Non native EMFs!

I am submitting this comment in response to HHS’s Request for Information on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs), Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation, and Wireless Radiation Exposure. In the past around 8 - 9 years I have not been able to sleep well. The lack of sleep made me very tired during day time. Over the years I tried herb teas, various supplements, they did not make any difference. A few months ago, I decided to turn off wifi in the house. Surprisingly I started to sleep well. At first I thought it was coincidence but it has been a few months now and I continue to sleep well. I feel so much better and more energy during the days. I am so happy that HHS is 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. Thank you for providing individuals and families with an opportunity to be heard and please continue to do that.

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 very concerned member of the public. I have concerns about wireless radiation for our home and our extended family. I have been on a detox journey of health for 9 years, having experienced cancer personally and being a caregiver for parents as well. Wireless radiation does impact our health and we know so little about the long term impact. Our current physical world and food and environment have all become toxic so that we generally accept disease as "normal" - but it doesn't have to be this way. As we have worked at detoxing our bodies, we limit the time on our phones, store them in another room so that we can have deeper sleep. It is noticeable when we don't - brain fog, for one. I believe this topic of wireless radiation needs to be independently assessed with the perspective of maximizing the health of our population, not to harm. If the agenda is anything else, we will be treated as consumers of whatever products that are designed to manage our symptoms, instead of end them. 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 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.