Is the legal limit for radiation emission based on science or is it based on political favors? Is it too low due to lobbying or too high based on arbitrary speculation?

https://www.idropnews.com/news...ation-limits/124680/

quote:

It allegedly found that the iPhone 8 and Galaxy S8 emitted “more than twice the federal exposure limit” at two millimeters. At zero millimeters, the iPhone 8 emitted “five times more” than that limit.

“The independent results confirm that RF radiation levels are well over the federal exposure limit, sometimes exceeding it by 500 percent, when phones are used in the way Apple and Samsung encourage us to,” said Beth Fagan, one of the firm’s managing partners.

Not sure if it's 5 times or it exceeds limits by 500%, which would be 6x, right? Either way be wary.

I've often suspected there may be a day of reckoning for all of us with a phone in our pocket all day. And now the watches have cellular capability.

quote:

Originally posted by mark123:
Is the legal limit for radiation emission based on science or is it based on political favors?

The FCC has set limits for exposure to all types of radio waves for decades. It’s not just cellular telephone emissions, and it’s certainly not new. In general the higher the frequency, the more concern there is about their biological effects. Even relatively low power amateur radio emissions are subject to standards and limits, and most ham radio frequencies are much, much lower than cell phone frequencies.

Based on some quick research (because I didn’t remember the details) microwave ovens that will quickly cook our food generate waves at a frequency of 2450 megahertz, and they have to be sealed to prevent (hopefully) escape of the radiation. Early cell phones in the US operated in the 800 MHz range, but now it has increased as high as 1900 MHz By way of comparison, exposure cautions for amateur radio operators start in the 10 meter band that runs from about 28 to 30 MHz (albeit at much higher energies than cell phone transmissions).

Several years ago a study published in a top tier science journal reported finding changes in biological cells as a result to exposure to low level emissions at cellular phone frequencies. Strangely (to me, anyway) that study was ignored by the news reporting companies, and I’ve never seen any sort of follow up. On the contrary, there have been any number of generic “There’s nothing to worry about” statements that have appeared at various times over the years, but without much backup that I could see.

Many people assume that if manufacturers are allowed to get away with unsafe practices it’s because of nefarious behind the scenes lobbying or even worse by the companies themselves. In fact, however, the opposite is sometimes true. Sufficient pressure from the public at large can suppress or even eliminate the actions that the government takes when there may be a danger but it can’t be demonstrated conclusively. One such example from years ago was the reversal of the attempted ban on saccharine. That was the one time I recall my mother’s writing a letter to Congress in protest.

What would be the reaction to the FCC’s declaring that cell phones posed a health hazard in the absence of firm specific evidence? Developing cancer or other diseases from various substances and chemicals often requires years of heavy exposure. But who objects if the “government” suddenly bans the use of cadmium for plating or a building has to be sealed off for asbestos mitigation? Almost every thing I buy today, it seems, has the California warning about some sort of health hazard. On the other hand, what would be the public reaction if cell phones had to be completely redesigned so that people didn’t screw them into their ears all day long and their range was suddenly reduced by four-fifths?

I don’t have evidence to support my suspicions, but I would not be the least surprised that if at some point in the future cell phones get blamed for some sort of health problem. When/if that happens, there will be great public outcry against the government for letting its happen, phone manufacturers will be sued right and left, warnings will have to be put on the devices ... and people will continue to use them as before as long as they are permitted to do so.

Basic WiFi fills your house with 2.5GHz, which is essentially the same as your microwave oven. But at a much lower power. Free space air loss is distance dependent. My iPhone in my pocket has multiple radios for WiFi, BlueTooth, and cellular data. All firing away trying to bring me that latest text message, and of course beaming all sorts of data about me and my movements to the various borg data aggregators.

I do try to take my phone out of my pocket and set it down as much as possible. Perhaps a good motivator for buying the bigger phone. It'll decrease your exposure to radiation.

The radio frequencies at which cell phones operate are non-ionizing, meaning the individual photons don't have enough energy to cause changes at the molecular level (increasing output power doesn't change the energy per photon, which is dependent only on frequency).

There is no scientific explanation for how non-ionizing radiation would cause cancer, as long as the output power is not high enough to literally cook you by raising your temperature.

By contrast, stuff like the UV light in sunlight and X-rays are ionizing radiation, which is why they can cause cancer.

quote:

Originally posted by mark123:
Is the legal limit for radiation emission based on science or is it based on political favors? Is it too low due to lobbying or too high based on arbitrary speculation?

From the linked article:

quote:

What This Means for You
It’s worth noting that The Chicago Tribune’s testing was meant to simulate the worst possible scenario, meaning that users won’t necessarily reach those levels of RF radiation exposure during normal usage. It isn’t clear whether Fagan Scott’s testing was carried out in the same way.

There’s also no concrete evidence that RF radiation levels above federal limits can actually cause harm to users. So while it makes for a punchy headline, users shouldn’t be too alarmed at the results.

I would give all the credibility into a lawyer's lab results that I would give an engineer's expostulations on fine legal points.

quote:

Originally posted by joel9507:
I would give all the credibility into a lawyer's lab results that I would give an engineer's expostulations on fine legal points.

I don't disagree.

I never thought RF radiation caused issues until I read and article about police frequently running speed traps using radar ended up with unusually high levels of cancer on the side near the radar unit. Other articles talked about people living next to power substations having higher instances of cancer.

You can cook something in a microwave with very low power, but it takes a long time. Hmmm.

quote:

allegedly emit more than legal limit of radiation

Even if this claim is true, you'd have to have the thing glued to your ear and yakking on it 24/7 for a decade to cause any harm. I don't have any more problem with this alleged radiation than with, say, the night sights on my handgun. Moreover, if the claim is true, would the phones not be recalled?

quote:

Originally posted by bryan11:
I never thought RF radiation caused issues until I read and article about police frequently running speed traps using radar ended up with unusually high levels of cancer on the side near the radar unit. Other articles talked about people living next to power substations having higher instances of cancer.

You can cook something in a microwave with very low power, but it takes a long time. Hmmm.

Most microwaves can't modulate power level, their lower power modes work by turning on and off and the lowest power level is on 10% of the time. A cheap, low power microwave puts out 800 watts and the shielding results in almost all the radiated power going into the food.

An LTE cellphone has a maximum transmit power of 0.2 watts, and being in the open air, only a small fraction of the radiated power goes into your body.

When you stand outside in the sunlight, you're getting hit by hundreds of watts of more dangerous frequencies of radiation (sunlight intensity is ~1000 watts per square meter).

Apples and road apples: The nuclear radiation from night sights is a different type than from cell phones and doesn’t leave the lamps. If the radio frequency cell phone radiation doesn’t leave the phone, we don’t talk to anyone.

The radar unit radiation was blamed on the increased incidence of testicular cancer among LEOs who used them and had a tendency to place them between their legs when not being used for speed readings.

Radium was considered to be so harmless at one time that the women who painted watches with it would sometimes paint their teeth to impress their friends in the dark. It was also used in various “cures” for different ailments. Smoking was another example and it took a long time for it to be recognized as a health hazard—but not least because of pushback from smokers who did not want anyone to interfere with their habit. We see the same thing from vaping addicts today.

The simple fact is that the hazards posed by many different things don’t become apparent until long after they have been in use. I have a cell phone and use it when I need to without worrying about its effects. I’m also going on 74 years of age. If, however, I had a kid with a phone, I would be concerned about its long term effects just as I would if he was vaping or using marijuana. None of us is getting out of here alive and it’s impossible to live anything like a normal life while avoiding all possible hazards. We must even run certain risks to avoid worse ones. But a head-in-the-sand “It hasn’t killed me yet” approach doesn’t mean that they don’t exist or that we shouldn’t avoid the ones we can.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund,

FCC calls bullshit in a report 12/10/2019 addressing this.

SNIP:

5 CONCLUSION
All sample cell phones tested by the FCC Laboratory, both grantee-provided and FCC- purchased samples, produced maximum 1-g average SAR values less than the 1.6 W/kg limit specified in the FCC rules. Therefore, all tested sample devices comply with the FCC RF radiation exposure general population/uncontrolled limits for peak spatial-average SAR of
1.6 W/kg, averaged over any 1 gram of tissue as specified in 47 CFR § 2.1093(d)(2), and these tests did not produce evidence of violations of any FCC rules regarding maximum RF exposure levels.

Report

quote:

Originally posted by cparktd:
FCC calls bullshit in a report 12/10/2019 addressing this.

SNIP:

5 CONCLUSION
All sample cell phones tested by the FCC Laboratory, both grantee-provided and FCC- purchased samples, produced maximum 1-g average SAR values less than the 1.6 W/kg limit specified in the FCC rules. Therefore, all tested sample devices comply with the FCC RF radiation exposure general population/uncontrolled limits for peak spatial-average SAR of
1.6 W/kg, averaged over any 1 gram of tissue as specified in 47 CFR § 2.1093(d)(2), and these tests did not produce evidence of violations of any FCC rules regarding maximum RF exposure levels.

Report

They did not call bullshit? They tested per their parameters and they passed. They did not test based on the The Chicago Tribune’s testing method. Of course it would make sense that the closer the phone is to your body the more radiation is released. Personally I do not hold the phone away from my head while using it. It is pressed directly against my ear. Not sure I would hear it at 5mm or 10mm (~.2" or .4").

This testing only shows that the phones are in compliance with FCC rules. I still wonder what what effects the radiation has at the distances I use it, and why the further testing distance is used by the FCC?

As I understand it... the law suit claims the phones violate the law...
The FCC report says they do not... "emit more then the limit of radiation"

NOW...
If you want to argue the law or the FCC testing methods are flawed or need to be stricter that is an entirely different matter.

Cell phones have been around for what ~20 years? If they are frying our brains or causing long term health problems we should be seeing it come into play fairly soon I would think.

quote:

Originally posted by cparktd:
NOW...
If you want to argue the law or the FCC testing methods are flawed or need to be stricter that is an entirely different matter.

Cell phones have been around for what ~20 years? If they are frying our brains or causing long term health problems we should be seeing it come into play fairly soon I would think.

Might explain some of our millennial behaviors.

.

For me, the difference is that I don't place a microwave oven, WiFi, or short-wave radio transmitter next to my brain.

I also do not hold my cell phone next to my brain, I have always used a headset and I always will. Yes there have been times when I sent a call to voicemail when my headset was not where I expected it to be, and I'm fine with that.

.

Great! The government’s going to insist on cellphones being at least a foot from the user. If you think it’s bad now, just wait until everyone uses speakerphone mode in the future! Then we won’t be worrying about radiation exposure, just hearing protection.

quote:

sometimes exceeding it by 500 percent,

"This one goes to 11"

As one who has actually done this type of testing, yes, in a shielded lab (Anechoic chamber), I can tell you that repeatability can be very difficult -- even plugging in the charge cord or tightening a screw on the phone can have drastic effects on the measurement. What matters is that some NRTL lab tested it someplace under worst case conditions, and it passed, so they put their NRTL approval on it. This is like a survey done on your land. Once it's stamped by a licensed surveyor, that's that. There is no lawyer bringing in a bunch of surveyors to re-survey the land until they get the result they want, unless the first surveyor was drunk or something. Or in this case, if they can prove that Apple did a Volkswagon Diesel testing thing on them, which they did not. Another example: Once the building inspector inspects and stamps work, it's done, unless someone later goes and changes the work.

quote:

Originally posted maladat:
by An LTE cellphone has a maximum transmit power of 0.2 watts, and being in the open air, only a small fraction of the radiated power goes into your body.

As a point of reference the Motorola Portable Radios popular with Police/Fire departments in standard configuration put out like 2.5 to 5 watts depending on the band used-- where's the outrage? (I know, it's not next to your brain, but still.....)

Yup. I'm more worried about the teenage driver who is texting and crossing the double yellow line than I am the radiation from the phone.

here's a short video on how the radiation testing is done at the NRTL lab, if anyone cares: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwKYB1NpXQo

quote:

Originally posted by cparktd:

Cell phones have been around for what ~20 years? If they are frying our brains or causing long term health problems we should be seeing it come into play fairly soon I would think.

The cell phones of 20 years ago put out one hell of a lot more average power than today's cell phones. That's a contributing factor as to why talk time is so long these days. (there are other factors as well)

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
The cell phones of 20 years ago put out one hell of a lot more average power than today's cell phones. That's a contributing factor as to why talk time is so long these days. (there are other factors as well)

I said earlier 4G/LTE phones had a maximum transmit power of 0.2 watts - if you go back a while, some old cell technologies switched between 0.6 W and 3 W transmit modes based on signal strength.

quote:

Originally posted by mark123:

quote:

Originally posted by joel9507:
I would give all the credibility into a lawyer's lab results that I would give an engineer's expostulations on fine legal points.

I don't disagree.

I’m sure that the lawyers used a certified lab and didn’t run the tests themselves. Now, they may have had to shop around a bit to find the lab that would give them the results they wanted, but...