Comments on: The FCC Must Prioritize Public Health Over Telecom Profits

By: Daya Soudan

Daya Soudan — Thu, 10 Apr 2025 00:13:08 +0000

I support the longtime work of Pat Burke in the fight to regulate EMF emissions in the wider Boston area

By: Deb

Deb — Sat, 05 Apr 2025 01:48:16 +0000

I have long been aware of the fact that I am very sensitive to electromagnetic radiation , bot television and 5 G, since the research about the devastating effects of 5G radiation on deer performed in Texas at the Jake Pickle research center. This research, as well as the horribly high incidence of glioma at Nina Otero Elementary School after the installation of an apparently weaponized cell tower next to the school. Eight children contracted glioma and the info was erased from the internet. This is ugly and murderous. I also remember when D Trump was traveling in my state and the internet was interrupted ( shut down all over the state) that the tinnitus I have been experiencing stopped completely , then started again the moment the powers that be turned it back on, immediately. It has continued since. This is a war on average citizens by little boys infatuated with electronics and ignorant of the dangers. X Deb Dee.

By: Ken B

Ken B — Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:11:41 +0000

Cell phone towers, just like high-power transmission lines, have posed a health risk for some time now, with inadequate regulation. While more community control over the placement of these 5G towers is welcome, wider area-based regulation may need consideration. If unchecked, I foresee more affluent communities using their financial and political clout to minimize 5G’s negative health effects. Which means that poorer communities will end up with disproportionately higher concentrations of 5G cell towers, many of those towers serving their more affluent neighbors. Therefore, a balance of local, state, and federal control may be necessary to spread the risks across socioeconomic populations.