From the Quiet Earth to the Light Age

A Mission Manifesto for RF‑Safe Connectivity

Dedication. For our children—today’s and tomorrow’s.

Preface: Why I Won’t Let This Go

I am writing this as a father, an engineer, and someone who has lived the costs of getting wireless policy wrong.

In 1977, at seven years old, I lost a kidney. My parents were living on a military base in Virginia Beach, Virginia, with radar in the background of daily life. In 1995, I lost my firstborn daughter. Two years later, research appeared showing profound developmental harm in embryos exposed to microwaves. After decades of reading, building, testing, and listening, my conclusion is simple: non‑thermal exposure matters—especially for children—and the way we deploy and measure RF must change.

I’ve never been content to just criticize. In the 1990s I designed an interferometric antenna to reduce head exposure and eliminate hearing‑aid buzzing. Hearing‑aid advocacy groups leveraged that engineering win, and in 2003 the FCC adopted Hearing Aid Compatibility rules with M/T ratings based on ANSI C63.19. It was a quiet, practical victory that improved millions of lives. It proved a point I still believe: engineer for people first and policy will follow.

This manifesto is the one piece I’ve always wanted to write—the whole story in one place, from Earth’s natural “quiet” to a concrete plan for safer connectivity. It’s not anti‑technology. It’s pro‑life‑compatible technology.

Part I — The Quiet Earth: Life’s Electromagnetic Goldilocks

Life emerged inside a narrow, quiet electromagnetic niche. The ozone layer filters DNA‑damaging UV‑B/UV‑C; the magnetosphere and ionosphere deflect and shape high‑energy particles and the ambient EM backdrop. Biology does not just run on heat; it runs on signals—timed, low‑noise electrical and molecular cues.

Nature even invented “hacks” for UV damage (e.g., proteins in hardy organisms that shield DNA). There is no hack for chronic, scrambled signaling. Modern, pulsed, information‑bearing RF is unlike the background that shaped our physiology. Treating safety as a pure thermal problem ignores how living systems actually coordinate.

Part II — 140 Years of Momentum: From Maxwell & Hertz to Ubiquitous RF

In 1888, Heinrich Hertz demonstrated the radio waves that Maxwell predicted. Hertz died young, at 36, of what modern medicine identifies as granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA)—a historical note, not proof of RF harm, but a sober marker at radio’s dawn: physics raced ahead; biomedicine lagged.

Across the 20th century, radio and microwaves powered broadcast, radar, and mobile revolutions. Exposure limits hardened around heating alone. Meanwhile, studies kept reporting non‑thermal bioeffects, especially from pulsed digital signals. We built an RF world with 19th‑century physics, 20th‑century regulation, and 21st‑century ubiquity—without updating how we measure risk.

Part III — What the Science Shows Now

1) Animal cancer: high‑certainty signals

WHO‑commissioned systematic work in 2025 concluded high certainty of evidence for malignant heart schwannomas and brain gliomas in male rats under long‑term RF exposure—aligning with the U.S. National Toxicology Program and Ramazzini Institute bioassays. Benchmarks appear at or below commonly referenced device SARs.

2) Male‑factor fertility: upgraded evidence

A WHO‑commissioned experimental review (with a 2025 corrigendum) judged male fertility harm to be high‑certainty overall (e.g., reduced pregnancy success, degraded sperm parameters). One high‑SAR study inflated pooled effect sizes; excluding it lowers the estimate, but directional signals and dose trends persist.

3) Human observational data: mixed and method‑limited

Systematic reviews of human fertility and female reproductive outcomes (2024) rated the evidence limited/very‑uncertain at typical exposures—reflecting exposure misclassification, confounding, and rapidly changing use patterns. Translation: animal/mechanistic evidence is stronger right now than population‑level epidemiology.

4) Mechanisms & functional effects

A large literature reports oxidative stress (ROS), VGCC‑mediated calcium signaling, gene expression changes, and DNA damage at sub‑thermal levels. A controlled PET study showed localized increases in brain glucose metabolism near an active handset after a 50‑minute call—functional change without heating. Developmental windows appear especially vulnerable in animal work (prenatal exposure → behavioral/cognitive effects).

5) Heavy‑use subsets

The Interphone project found no overall increase in glioma/meningioma, but reported a ~40% glioma increase in the heaviest callers (top decile ≈ ~30 minutes/day over 10 years), with the usual case‑control caveats. This underlines the need for dose‑aware, modern metrics.

Bottom line: The evidence is not monochrome. It is strong enough—particularly in animals and mechanisms—to warrant precaution, better metrics, and safer defaults now.

Part IV — Law & Governance: How We Lost Our Voice

1996: U.S. RF limits set on thermal grounds.
Telecom Act §704: cities cannot deny towers on health grounds if FCC limits are met. Communities are effectively muted on siting/design health concerns.
2019–2021: The FCC retained 1996 limits; in 2021, the D.C. Circuit remanded that decision for failing to address non‑thermal and children’s risks.
2025: Nearly four years later, no new exposure standards responsive to that remand; no practical roadmap that accounts for modern evidence and use.

My position: The FCC is expert in spectrum and services. Chronic exposure and health belong with agencies that carry health mandates. Congress should restore primary health oversight for RF to EPA/FDA under the Radiation Control for Health & Safety Act and modernize it for non‑ionizing radiation. Local governments must regain lawful discretion to favor health‑protective siting and design when alternatives exist.

Part V — The Clean Ether Act

Policy & Engineering Blueprint (Actionable)

A. Purpose & Principles

Purpose: Make connectivity life‑compatible by design.
Principles:
1. Health‑first defaults—especially for children, bedrooms, classrooms, clinics.
2. Measure what matters beyond 6‑minute SAR: peaks, pulse structure, duty cycle, proximity hotspots, cumulative dose.
3. Prefer photons indoors—standardize optical (Li‑Fi/OWC) and wired backbones for high‑bandwidth links.
4. Transparency—public right‑to‑know RF conditions in homes, schools, workplaces, and public spaces.
5. Local voice restored—allow health‑protective siting/design when compliant alternatives exist.

B. Who Does What — Results‑First Checklist

1) Congress

Reassign health oversight of chronic, non‑ionizing RF to EPA/FDA; establish a permanent Non‑Ionizing Radiation Office with pediatric expertise.
Reform §704 to permit health‑protective siting/design (distance, orientation, shielding, wired/optical options).
Fund an Exposure‑Modernization Program:
- National RF mapping (peaks, pulses, duty cycles) for schools/clinics/housing.
- Grants to convert public buildings to fiber + Li‑Fi with wired backbones.
- Independent replications of animal‑tumor/fertility findings using modern modulations and open dosimetry.
Procurement mandates: Federal sites and grantees adopt wired/optical‑first indoors and exposure‑minimizing defaults on devices.

2) EPA / FDA (Health Agencies)

Set exposure goals and contextual targets (e.g., nighttime bedroom targets for children; ultra‑quiet NICUs).
Define non‑thermal metrics & test protocols: peak E‑field, envelope shape (pulse), duty cycle, time‑weighted dose, on‑body hotspot maps at 0 mm.
Require device/environment labeling: publish exposure profiles for phones, wearables, routers, and classrooms.
Launch post‑market surveillance: a privacy‑aware registry linking environmental telemetry and reported outcomes.

3) FCC

Open a new RF health docket on non‑thermal metrics and exposure‑aware network design (beam‑forming away from residences; child‑sensitive zones).
Prioritize authorization of optical/low‑RF indoor systems; include exposure budgets in site approvals.
Require RF dashboards from carriers/OEMs (time‑series peaks, not just averages).

4) States & Localities

Update building codes:
- Wired backbones in new construction/major retrofits.
- Li‑Fi‑ready lighting (power/backhaul to luminaires).
- RF‑quiet rooms in schools/clinics.
Adopt permitting guidelines that favor:
- Distance from bedrooms/classrooms;
- Antenna orientation away from homes;
- Lower‑power microcells with fiber;
- Co‑location to reduce total sites.

5) Industry (OEMs, OS vendors, Carriers, Lighting)

Ship safer defaults:
- On‑body detection → output throttling and proximity alerts.
- Bedtime radio scheduler for Wi‑Fi/cellular/Bluetooth.
- One‑tap wired/optical priority indoors.
Publish exposure telemetry (opt‑in, privacy‑preserving): duty cycle, peaks, time‑near‑body, and cumulative dose proxies.
Accelerate 802.11bb Li‑Fi in access points, laptops, tablets, phones, and lighting.

6) Schools & Health Systems

Wired‑first networks; Li‑Fi in classrooms and patient areas; RF‑quiet rooms.
Post RF maps for staff/parents; adopt device policies for distance/duration/damping.
Train staff in exposure‑aware practices.

7) Researchers & Funders

Replicate animal tumor and male‑fertility endpoints with current waveforms (5G/6G burst structures).
Standardize dosimetry/reporting for pooled analyses.
Build open datasets linking environmental telemetry to health outcomes (with strict privacy).

8) Families & Individuals (The 3‑D Rule)

Distance: speaker/stand; don’t carry active phones against the body.
Duration: shorter sessions; radio‑off windows at night.
Damping: turn off unused radios; hard‑wire stationary gear.

C. Engineering the Transition (Indoors First)

Network architecture: Fiber/PoE to the room + Li‑Fi downlink via luminaires for high‑bandwidth tasks; reserve RF for mobility/voice/emergency. Place access points above head height, away from beds/desks; power just enough to cover the room.

Device behavior: On‑body power control; dynamic duty‑cycle scaling; auto‑prefer wired/optical when present; auto‑sleep radios on screen‑off; exposure readout (peaks, time‑near‑body, cumulative estimate) with plain‑language tips.

Measurement & labels: Report peaks & pulses (not only 6‑min averages); hotspot maps at 0 mm and typical carry positions; context labels (“at‑ear,” “in‑pocket,” “on‑lap”).

Building design: RF‑quiet zones (shielding + optical service) for bedrooms, nurseries, ICU/NICU, testing centers; wired workstations by default; device parking at room edges; router placement away from seating/sleeping.

D. Implementation Timeline (12–24 Months)

0–6 months

Congress drafts Clean Ether package (oversight + funding).
EPA/FDA publish metrics blueprint; launch pilot RF mapping in schools/clinics.
FCC opens non‑thermal metrics docket; OEMs ship bedtime radio and on‑body alerts.

6–12 months

Federal procurement flips to wired/optical‑first indoors; grants awarded for school conversions.
First 802.11bb classroom pilots at scale; exposure dashboards in major OS releases.
States adopt wired‑backbone requirements in code.

12–24 months

National RF dashboards for schools/clinics/housing.
Li‑Fi‑capable devices widely available; carriers expose per‑site peak/pulse telemetry.
Hospitals/schools certify RF‑quiet rooms; insurers add wellness credits for exposure‑aware buildings.

E. Accountability, Enforcement, Transparency

Public dashboards: ambient RF (peaks/pulses/duty) for public buildings, updated at least quarterly.
Compliance audits: random checks on device labels vs. emitted profiles and building targets.
Right‑to‑know: parents, tenants, and patients access RF maps and device exposure profiles in plain language.
Audit trails: site approvals/waivers must document health‑protective alternatives considered and why they were accepted or rejected.

F. What Success Looks Like

Children sleep and learn in quieter EM environments—without sacrificing bandwidth.
Public agencies model wired/optical‑first; RF becomes targeted, not omnipresent.
Devices tell the truth about peaks, pulses, and proximity—and ship with safer defaults.
Communities regain a lawful voice in siting and design.
Research quality rises (cleaner dosimetry; better pooling), so policy can iterate on evidence instead of waiting decades.

Part VI — A Personal Footnote: Engineering That Led to Policy

I built the interferometric antenna to lower head exposure and remove hearing‑aid buzzing. Hearing‑aid and hard‑of‑hearing communities pushed for fair access under the ADA. In 2003, the FCC’s HAC rule formalized M/T ratings—a real‑world, quietly transformative change. This is the model: identify the harm, build the fix, and press policy to codify it.

Part VII — Practical Guidance Now (“3‑D Rule”)

Distance: Use speakerphone, wired headsets, or a stand. Avoid carrying active phones against the body.
Duration: Prefer shorter sessions; schedule radio‑off windows at night.
Damping: Turn off radios you’re not using; hard‑wire anything that doesn’t need to be wireless.

Part VIII — Closing

We solved leaded gasoline, secondhand smoke, and acid rain not by retreating from modern life, but by engineering smarter and governing honestly. We can do the same here—keep the signal, cut the unnecessary noise, and move from the Microwave Age to the Light Age.

If this resonates, help make it real: support wired/optical‑first in the places children sleep and learn; demand truthful metrics and safer defaults; call on Congress to restore health oversight and reform Section 704.

I invite you to build with me. At RF Safe, we maintain what I believe is the largest searchable library of peer‑reviewed RF health research and a comprehensive SAR comparison database to help families and policymakers make informed choices. The microwave era powered industries and war machines; the Light Age can power human health, learning, and resilience.

This is my life’s work. Let’s finish it.

Author’s Note

This document reflects my considered judgment after decades of reading and building. It integrates WHO‑commissioned systematic reviews (2024–2025), large bioassays (NTP, Ramazzini), human studies, and engineering practice. I welcome rigorous debate on methods and metrics—but I will not accept silence where children’s biology is concerned.

Source