Five phones with high radiation.
 

Whether this makes sense or not, I do not know.

Probably the next 40 years we might have definitive results on the effect
of cell phone usage.

For what its worth 5 phones with the highest SAR - Specific Absorption Rate, within the legal
limit.

http://www.yahoo.com/tech/if-youre-c...281813979.html

Also good to keep in mind that the RF pwr level out of your phone is regulated by the cell towers. If the tower is receiving at a low level, it sends a command to your phone to crank up it's transmit. This is why your battery doesn't last very long when you are somewhere remote with poor coverage.
Shielded environments will also increase your phone transmit level- inside a car, in a metal building, tucked between the fat rolls of an obese person, etc.
Obviously, the higher the transmit level, the higher the absorption rate. I assume this testing was done with the phones forced to max power out.

Samsung antenna design puts them well down in undesirable radiation, Motorola Droid was worst.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Thanks for the insight.

One of the reasons (among many) that we don't have them.

If one is concerned about this (I'm not), a bluetooth earbud will solve the problem.

Bluetooth earbuds would get the RF away from your skull, but if the phone's in your pocket, your body is still absorbing the signal to the tower, which is in the 900MHz range.
When you turn on Bluetooth, your cell is now also transmitting at ~2.45GHz, although at a much lower power level. Note that if it's a two way Bluetooth device (has a mic) the earbud device is also transmitting at 2.45GHz.
So, Bluetooth is a good idea, as long as you set the phone down several feet away, but that makes staying mobile pretty clunky- every time you want to move to another room, you have to go pick up the phone and find a spot to set it in the next location.

Between health concerns, privacy concerns, ID theft concerns, addiction concerns, and the loss of face to face interpersonal interaction, and the highway robbery plan rates, I'd love to see people shun them. I don't think it will ever happen though.
Personally, if I didn't need it for work, I'd not have one. Some day...

I feel it for my grand daughter....she is glued to this thing 24/7...geez!

Does it matter?

Does anyone still talk on the phone?

Not many I know.

Your cell phone is still transmitting RF, regardless if you are talking on it or texting, or surfing the net. Even when the display is off and it's sitting in your pocket, RF is transmitting keep alive signals back to the tower.
Only when in airplane mode, or with the battery removed, is it no longer a transmitter.

In a nutshell, RF radiation from cell phones has no proven health effects.

Some health and safety interest groups have interpreted certain reports to suggest that wireless device use may be linked to cancer and other illnesses, posing potentially greater risks for children than adults. While these assertions have gained increased public attention, currently no scientific evidence establishes a causal link between wireless device use and cancer or other illnesses. Those evaluating the potential risks of using wireless devices agree that more and longer-term studies should explore whether there is a better basis for RF safety standards than is currently used. The FCC closely monitors all of these study results. However, at this time, there is no basis on which to establish a different safety threshold than our current requirements.

http://www.fcc.gov/guides/wireless-d...ealth-concerns
http://hps.org/hpspublications/artic...radiation.html

I remember we were told we couldn't sit too close to the color tv as it gave off some sort of something bad for you and it would be bad for the eyes.

Then when the microwave oven came there were warnings about the radiation and a warning for people with pace makers.

My body has received so much radiation this year, I don't thing a few little cell phone rays are going to be a problem for me.

It's probably a bigger health risk to stand on the corner when a city bus goes by spewing black smoke out the back.

I still think TV messes up my eyes, and I stand away from the microwave when it is in operation.

I am just not comfortable with cell phone close to my brain.

I admit I am irrational when it comes to cancer and its causes.

Microwave oven use RF to cook. I do not trust the the industry to tell me the truth.

RF energy does have effects on tissue. Whether it effects a majority of the users will be seen. Just remember cigarettes were once considered safe.

On cancer I read a study where what ones grandparents or past generations did is carried thru the genes and effects later generations. Illnesses like Diabetes cancer lung heart obesity were caused by the life styles of our ancestors. Somehow the DNA is effected.

I keep my flip phone without a camera BTW away as much as possible and calls to short ones.




Barney

Not all radiation is ionizing radiation (the bad stuff). RF waves do damage by causing things to cook (like a microwave oven does). A cell phone positioned at your ear doesn't have near the energy to heat up your brain, much less your ear. Being outside on a sunny day, flying in an airplane or getting a dental X-Ray has far more potential for harm.

Yeah, we know.

isn't the conversation about the waves being next to you head though?

Are we also talking about ball cancer?

Ayup. Much ado about nothing.

No, the article cited by the OP is about radiation health hazards in general.
While there's no debate about ionizing radiation heating up and cooking cells, basically due to the cells vibrating which causes friction, the debate continues regarding the effects of non-ionizing radiation, which some believe cause changes in cells via a mechanism not yet understood.
Personally, I'm skeptical there's enough of an issue to warrant concern. Then again, history is chock full of examples where we assumed something relatively safe- lead, asbestos, DDT, dioxin...

You got it exactly backwards. Non-ionizing radiation, which RF radiation is, harms tissue via heating it. Ionizing radiation (the bad stuff from nuclear bombs/power) causes cancer by causing cellular mutations and is very well understood. It has been studied extensively since Hiroshima and is probably better understood than nearly every other industrial hazard, including thousands of industrial chemicals.

FWIW, I did coursework on radiation hazards/protection at the Harvard School of Public Health and worked over twenty years in and around defense nuclear facilities.

Repeat that Wasil! :D

Just how does RF heat tissue? By the Rf oscillating the soft tissue. Thus causing the tissue or matter to heat up. Not by radiant heat but a mechanical vibration of the tissue IIRC.

Nuclear radiation pokes holes in tissue and causes mutations at the cell level also IIRC. Different yes!



Barney

Was used to bathe in hexavalent chromium. ;)

I stand corrected re ionizing/non-ionizing.
The debate, or some would say conspiracy theory, is that RF (non-ionizing), may have effects beyond just heating, which cause health problems.
There are also the theories we've all heard that bee populations are effected by RF in the environment. Also far from proven.

RF and tissues/matter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_heating

""As the field alternates, the molecules reverse direction. Rotating molecules push, pull, and collide with other molecules (through electrical forces), distributing the energy to adjacent molecules and atoms in the material. Once distributed, this energy appears as heat.[2]""



Barney

Water and water based compounds tend to be most affected followed by drier substances.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

What percentage of the human brain is water?




Barney

Five phones with high radiation.
 

That depends on whose brains we are talking about here.

I was waiting for that, what percentage of tea is water?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

BAM!! :D

I'm waiting for the second hand radiation lawsuits.

Pete

I thought we'd see a bunch of lawsuits when they figured out working 2nd and 3rd shift had serious health implications, but never heard of any. Where's that union when you need them?

It is interesting to note that the Russian and Chinese RF limits are 100 lower than American limits....

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/meetings/...rna_Foster.pdf