Comments Submitted for the Record Re: 19-226, Studying Impacts of 5G Radiation on Humans Through Safety Testing June 3, 2020
Brief Comment:
To Whom It May Concern at the Federal Communications Commission:
As the Federal agency lead from 1997 to 2014 — when I retired from the Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — on all things human impacting migratory birds, I led my agency by responding to impacts from radiation to migratory birds and other wildlife. This included testimony I presented to the FCC, comments I presented at scientific and technical conferences, comments at meetings with industry groups (e.g., I chaired the Communication Tower Working Group on behalf of USFWS), publication of peer-reviewed scientific papers and a wildlife book chapter, technical comments provided from the Department of Interior to the Department of Commerce on radiation and NEPA, and comments presented on behalf of USFWS in PowerPoints, among others. Now as a private wildlife consultant and part-time adjunct professor for Johns Hopkins University, I also continue to study the impacts of radiation on human health, welfare and safety, including impacts from millimeter-wide radiation frequencies on humans from 5G. The race to implement 5G and the push by FCC to approve the related 5G license frequencies to industry are very troubling and downright dangerous. As the coauthor of a pending peer-reviewed scientific paper on impacts from non-ionizing radiation on flora and fauna, frankly we still know very little about the safety and other impacts from 5G, although the military has already developed classified technologies (e.g., crowd-dispersing and anti-terrorism devices to break up gathered groups) and done classified studies on impacts from 5G which are not available to the public. Safety testing of the impacts of 5G has clearly been neglected, most certainly by the FCC. There exists an enormous challenge to answer the many questions still in need of further investigation regarding risks, threats and outcomes from using 5G, including impacts to public health and safety. Furthermore, the public deserves a full accounting of 5G before it is fully rolled out and becomes too late to manage — i.e., when the proverbial ‘horse is already out of the barn.’ Rather than categorically exclude 5G communication devices as FCC regularly does with virtually everything it licenses which emits non-thermal, non-ionizing radiation (e.g., cell phones, cell towers, smart-devices,WiFi and its routers, TV/microwave and radio antennas, and the many related technologies) — a process many of us feel is out-of-date and flawed, I strongly recommend the initiation of a detailed and robust scientific study on the impacts of 5G on human health and safety, conducted by an entity(ies) with no vested interest in the study outcomes. The results of such a study(s) must be made available to the public for full and transparent review and comment. Given the concerns raised by the public, scientific community, and related research arms about human safety, such a study effort is incredibly important and very timely. Rather than fight this study recommendation in Federal court, I strongly recommend FCC open up the process to public review and move to conduct the necessary studies to answer these the many troubling questions about the safety impacts of 5G. Let sound science be the primary driver in this effort. Respectfully submitted, Albert M. Manville, Ph.D., and Certified Wildlife Biologist