FDA Confirmation Toolkit
Senator-facing oversight page • share widely

The Next FDA Commissioner Must Enforce Public Law 90-602 and End the Wireless Radiation Regulatory Gap

The FCC is a communications regulator. HHS/FDA is where Congress placed the public-health responsibility for electronic product radiation. Confirmation must become the moment when senators demand the medical review the FCC cannot perform.

No confirmation without a written RF-radiation compliance commitment.

The next Commissioner must commit to a 90-day Public Law 90-602 compliance report, a modern RF-EMF health-risk assessment, a formal FDA/HHS response to the 2021 FCC remand, corrected public safety messaging, and a restored federal RF exposure research program.

Contact senators Use hearing questions Copy scripts

Core test for every nominee

Will FDA treat wireless radiation safety as part of its legal mission — or repeat decades of silence while the public lives under outdated, court-remanded exposure assumptions?

Use this page as a public brief, senator handout, activist landing page, or confirmation-hearing checklist.

Current confirmation context

FDA leadership is in transition.

Reuters reported that FDA Commissioner Marty Makary resigned on May 12, 2026, that Kyle Diamantas would lead FDA in an acting capacity, and that former FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn and former acting Commissioner / former HHS Assistant Secretary Brett Giroir were among names under consideration for permanent leadership.1

This page should describe Hahn and Giroir as “reported candidates under consideration,” not as formal nominees, unless and until the White House announces a formal nomination. That precision strengthens the argument. The oversight demand is the same either way: senators must ask the next nominee whether Public Law 90-602 still means what it says.

Departed Commissioner
Marty Makary
Reuters: resigned May 12, 2026, after weeks of pressure and internal disputes.1
Acting FDA Head
Kyle Diamantas
FDA lists him as Acting Commissioner; his official bio centers on the Human Foods Program.2
Reported Candidate
Stephen Hahn
Former FDA Commissioner, Dec. 2019–Jan. 2021; oncologist and radiation oncologist.3
Reported Candidate
Brett Giroir
Former HHS Assistant Secretary; Acting FDA Commissioner beginning Nov. 2019.4
Why the reported names require scrutiny

Returning prior leadership cannot be the default.

The issue is not whether these people have credentials. They do. The issue is whether prior FDA/HHS leadership allowed wireless radiation oversight to remain buried while the FDA and FCC maintained broad public reassurance language and the FCC’s RF limits were remanded by a federal court.

Ask hard
⚖️

Kyle Diamantas

Acting Commissioner

FDA’s own biography describes Diamantas as Acting Commissioner and says that, before that role, he led the agency’s Human Foods Program, overseeing nutrition and food-safety activities, resources, risk-prioritization, policy initiatives, and food-related response operations.2

  • No public record on the FDA page of leadership in RF bioeffects or radiation-health risk.
  • The immediate question is whether he will elevate CDRH/radiation expertise or allow the issue to stay buried.
Test: Will he create a serious RF radiation compliance plan — or treat the issue as outside FDA’s mission?
Ask hard
☢️

Stephen Hahn

Reported candidate

FDA’s historical page says Hahn served as FDA Commissioner from Dec. 17, 2019 to Jan. 20, 2021, and highlights his medical oncology and radiation oncology background.3

  • His radiation-oncology credentials make the RF silence more important, not less.
  • He served after the NTP final reports and during a period when FDA’s public posture remained broadly reassuring.
Test: What did FDA do under his watch to reassess RF limits after NTP? What will he do differently now?
Ask hard
🩺

Brett Giroir

Reported candidate

FDA’s page says Giroir was HHS Assistant Secretary for Health and that FDA Commissioner duties were delegated to him before he was appointed Acting FDA Commissioner in Nov. 2019.4

  • He was in HHS/FDA leadership during the same period when FCC relied on federal health-agency assurances.
  • That makes confirmation questioning essential, not optional.
Test: Will he acknowledge HHS/FDA responsibility under Public Law 90-602 and formally help resolve the FCC remand?

The standard should be simple.

Do not confirm a caretaker. Confirm a Commissioner who will champion RF radiation safety, enforce the statute, correct the public record, and make HHS/FDA do the health review the FCC cannot do.

The legal foundation

Congress already gave HHS/FDA the job.

Public Law 90-602, now part of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, did not cover only ionizing radiation. FDA’s own summary says “electronic product radiation” includes non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, and FDA lists cordless and cellular telephones as covered examples.5

21 U.S.C. § 360ii: Program of control

The Secretary “shall establish and carry out” an electronic product radiation control program to protect public health and safety. That program includes research, exposure evaluation, performance standards, and procedures to minimize unnecessary exposure.6

Develop and administer performance standards.
Plan, conduct, coordinate, and support research.
Study emissions and exposure conditions.
Develop procedures to minimize exposure.

21 U.S.C. § 360kk: Performance standards

The Secretary must prescribe performance standards for electronic products when necessary for public health and safety, and must consider the latest available scientific and medical data.7

Testing and measurement authority.
Warning signs, labels, and instructions.
Ongoing review of industry testing programs.
Use the latest science — not 1996 assumptions.
Senate authority

FDA’s statutory mission includes protecting public health and safety from electronic product radiation, and the Commissioner is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.8 That means senators have both the power and the duty to make wireless radiation safety a confirmation issue.

The regulatory gap

The public is trapped in an agency handoff.

FDA says it shares cell-phone responsibilities with the FCC, provides scientific input to the FCC, and collects and makes available scientific information about hazards and control of electronic product radiation. Yet FDA’s public cell-phone page still says the “weight of scientific evidence” has not linked cell-phone RF radiation with health problems and says the evidence does not show danger to children and teenagers.9

FCC

Sets and enforces RF exposure limits for wireless products and infrastructure, while relying on federal health-agency input.

↔

FDA/HHS

Has the health mission and radiation-control statute, but has allowed the public conversation to treat RF safety as mainly an FCC matter.

The court exposed this loop.

In 2021, the D.C. Circuit held that the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation that its RF guidelines adequately protect against harmful non-cancer effects. The court specifically criticized reliance on conclusory FDA statements, including statements about children, and required the FCC to address children, long-term exposure, wireless ubiquity, technological developments, and environmental effects.10

Why senators must act now

The evidence record has shifted.

This confirmation fight is not about proving every disputed endpoint during a hearing. It is about forcing FDA/HHS to perform the risk assessment Congress already required.

01

NTP found tumor and DNA-damage signals

FDA nominated cell-phone RFR for NTP study. NTP found clear evidence of malignant heart schwannomas in male rats, some evidence of malignant gliomas and adrenal tumors, and RFR-linked DNA damage in selected tissues.11

02

The federal RF research program stopped instead of modernizing

NTP says its follow-up system was not representative of 4G/4G-LTE/5G and that no further work with that system, and no additional RFR exposure studies, are planned at this time.12

03

Non-thermal biology cannot be dismissed

FDA approved TheraBionic P1, a handheld RF EMF generator that emits specific amplitude-modulated frequencies that may stop cancer cells from dividing; FDA also says it should not be used by people receiving calcium-channel blockers.13

04

Risk-assessment challenges are now explicit

Melnick and Moskowitz’s 2026 Environmental Health paper concludes current FCC/ICNIRP limits are 15–900 times higher than their cancer-risk estimates and 8–24 times higher than levels they estimate would protect male reproductive health.14

Public messaging problem

FDA removed old safety pages — but broad reassurance remains.

Reuters reported in January 2026 that FDA took down old webpages saying cellphones are not dangerous while HHS undertook an electromagnetic-radiation research review to identify knowledge gaps, including on new technologies.15 Yet FDA’s current page still contains broad reassurance language.9

Section 704 problem

Local governments are gagged while federal limits remain unresolved.

Section 704 bars state and local governments from regulating wireless facility placement on the basis of RF environmental effects if facilities comply with FCC regulations.16 That makes federal health review unavoidable.

Confirmation hearing script

Questions every senator should ask.

The nominee should answer these questions publicly, in writing, and before any committee or floor vote.

Do you acknowledge that HHS/FDA has statutory responsibility for electronic product radiation, including non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation from products such as cordless and cellular telephones?

Will you deliver a written Public Law 90-602 compliance report within 90 days of confirmation? The report must explain FDA/HHS work on research, exposure evaluation, public communication, exposure minimization, and performance-standard authority.

Will FDA conduct or commission a modern RF-EMF health-risk assessment? It must include chronic exposure, children, pregnancy, fertility, cancer, neurological effects, sleep, oxidative stress, DNA damage, modulation, pulsation, and non-thermal mechanisms.

Will FDA formally advise the FCC on the 2021 remand? The FCC should not rely on conclusory health-agency assurances. FDA/HHS must provide a medical and toxicological analysis responsive to the court.

Will you publicly explain FDA’s interpretation of the NTP findings? This includes malignant heart schwannomas, malignant gliomas, adrenal tumors, DNA-damage findings, and the fact that the studies were designed to limit heating.

Will you restore or replace federal RF exposure research? If the old NTP exposure system does not represent 4G, 5G, Wi-Fi, wearables, routers, and chronic indoor exposure, then the research must be modernized — not abandoned.

Will you correct FDA’s public-facing cell-phone safety language? FDA should distinguish between “not proven,” “not settled,” and “proven safe.” Public language should not imply certainty where the evidence record is contested and evolving.

Will you convene an independent RF-EMF advisory panel? It should include RF dosimetry experts, toxicologists, pediatric specialists, reproductive-health experts, oncologists, environmental-health scientists, biomedical engineers, and public representatives.

Will you support repeal or amendment of Section 704? Local governments should not be barred from considering RF health and environmental evidence while federal standards remain outdated, court-remanded, or not updated through a current medical risk assessment.

Will you appoint qualified RF bioeffects and radiation-health experts to senior advisory roles? FDA should not treat wireless radiation expertise as irrelevant to leadership of a radiation-emitting products program.

Public action plan

What supporters should do today.

1

Find your senators

Use the official Senate directory and call both offices. The Capitol Switchboard can connect you: 202-224-3121.17

Open Senate contact page →

2

Target HELP Committee members

The Senate HELP Committee handles FDA Commissioner nomination hearings. Ask members to use the questions above and submit them for the record.

Open HELP members →

3

Contact your House member

House members do not vote on confirmation, but they can demand oversight, send letters, oppose wireless-fast-tracking, and support Section 704 reform.

Find your Representative →

4

Share the toolkit

Send this page to state groups, parent groups, local officials, health-freedom networks, school-board contacts, and anyone who can call senators before a hearing.

Copy share text →

Phone script for senators

Tip: call both senators, then email the same text through their web forms.

Email / web form message

Personalize the first sentence and add one local concern: schools, towers, children, fertility, or community siting.

Short share text

Post with the toolkit image and ask people to tag both senators.
Sources used for this toolkit

Source record

This page uses official FDA/HHS/U.S. Code/Court sources where available, plus Reuters for current leadership status and the reported list of possible replacements. The advocacy conclusions are framed around statutory compliance, court remand, and public-health oversight.

  1. Reuters, May 12, 2026: Makary resignation; Kyle Diamantas acting; Hahn and Giroir reported under consideration.
  2. FDA biography: Kyle Diamantas, Acting Commissioner of Food and Drugs; Human Foods Program background.
  3. FDA historical biography: Stephen Hahn served as Commissioner from Dec. 17, 2019 to Jan. 20, 2021; oncology and radiation oncology background.
  4. FDA biography: Brett Giroir, HHS Assistant Secretary for Health; Acting FDA Commissioner beginning Nov. 2019.
  5. FDA summary of Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions: non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation and cordless/cellular telephones.
  6. 21 U.S.C. § 360ii: HHS Secretary must establish and carry out an electronic product radiation control program.
  7. 21 U.S.C. § 360kk: performance standards; latest available scientific and medical data.
  8. 21 U.S.C. § 393: FDA mission includes protection from electronic product radiation; Commissioner appointed with Senate advice and consent.
  9. FDA cell-phone page: FDA/FCC shared responsibilities; current public reassurance language; content current as of May 13, 2021.
  10. Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, D.C. Circuit, 2021: remand and court’s critique of FCC/FDA explanations.
  11. NTP cell-phone RFR page: FDA nomination; NTP tumor findings; DNA damage findings.
  12. NTP follow-up section: research system not representative of newer technologies; no further RFR exposure studies planned at this time.
  13. FDA TheraBionic P1 page: handheld RF EMF generator; amplitude-modulated frequencies; calcium-channel blocker contraindication.
  14. Melnick & Moskowitz, Environmental Health, 2026: benchmark-dose/risk-assessment analysis of RF exposure limits.
  15. Reuters, Jan. 15, 2026: HHS cellphone radiation study; FDA removed old webpages with old conclusions.
  16. 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv): Section 704 RF-emissions preemption language.
  17. U.S. Senate contact page: senator lookup and Capitol Switchboard number.
  18. U.S. House: Find Your Representative.