Slashdot Mirror
FCC Revisiting Mobile Device Radiation Standards
MojoKid writes "Did you know that the FCC hasn't updated its guidelines regarding maximum radiation levels in mobile devices since 1996? FCC chairman Julius Genachowski is apparently aware of this, because he's looking to launch a formal inquiry into the matter. In a statement that was recently circulated, the FCC isn't exactly concerned that current standards are too lax, but it makes sense to periodically review standards for an industry that changes and evolves so rapidly and dramatically. There has been much debate in recent years about the potential danger of radiation from cell phones, and although there has been some study on the subject, there is not yet a general consensus on whether there is a real danger from mobile device radiation, and if there is, what the acceptable levels might be."
Just the other day I was looking at my Galaxy Nexus and thinking "I wonder if this thing is safe, or if maybe I'm slowly frying my brain. After all the FCC hasn't updated their guidelines for maximum radiation levels for mobile devices since 1996".
You know I'm feeling relieved now.
1. I'm assuming there hasn't been too much radical human evolution since 1996.
2. Considering that modern devices likely emit lower levels of radiation simply to save battery life compared to the bricks of '96, I doubt that you are getting cooked by your iPhone in any worse way than by your grandpa's Startac.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
your head is probably not too smart. I don't worry about it because my phone only comes with 30 minutes a month... my expsoure is minimal. But alot of people talk, talk, talk with the phone broadcasting into their brain.
I imagine there's also some effect on your hip, as the phone is hanging there ~15 hours a day, and broadcasting.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Ionizing or non-ionizing?
If ionizing, why are cell phones emitting ionizing radiation at all?
If non-ionizing, it's completely harmless. No sane person worrys about non-ionizing radiation.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Cell phones use non-ionizing radiation. I'm all for some studies to double-check our assumptions, but hypothetically isn't that the end of the story?
Hopefully they will get rid of these BULLSHIT regulations. Handheld two way radios can put out up to SEVEN yes SEVEN watts and the FCC doesn't have any problems with those. I don't need a seven watt transmitter, but damnit allow them use use efficient antennas in cell phones. If a cop can use a five watt transmitter, why can't everybody else?
sudo mod me up
Chairman Genachowski believes that radiation, like data, should be looked at every couple years "to provide a better customer experience".
Genachowski said that
"usage-based pricing could be healthy and beneficial" for radiation providers. "There was a point of view a couple years ago that there was only one permissible pricing model for radiation," he said. "I didn't agree."
It makes sense that people who are exposed to more radiation should pay more to support the development and studies on radiation. Once we determine the correct amount of radiation that everyone can receive, then providers can work out plans that allow the consumer to share the radiation cap amongst all their devices.
You're right, there isn't a consensus:
Sane people: There is no danger.
Insane people: OMG, my cell phone is frying my brain! Hold on... I need to answer this call.
Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
Absolutely nothing worthwhile. They should actually look into the rampant corruption and outrageous pricing model of the cellphone carriers instead of worrying about a few alpha particles.
CDMA runs as floor noise, which means it has a very very low power output. I can't say I've ever had my CDMA drop except when no bars and I hold the phone wrong.
Let's revisit that. In fact let's investigate this whole witchcraft thing. I don't think that's been settled yet.
Considering that modern Cell phones operate near the frequency of uWave ovens, and the owners are placing the antennas next to their heads it would be prudent to limit your exposure.
Use a bluetooth headset or use the speaker phone setting. Get some distance between the antenna and your head. or just send a text message.
B.T.W.. A number of insurance co's now consider cell phone manufacturers to be Uninsurable Risks.
I find it ironic the amount of fear that there is against any sort of radiation. Remembering from my science class, radiation is basically any form of energy that doesn't need a medium to travel through. In other words, any form of energy that can travel through outer space can be considered radiation. There's only a very small spectrum of energy that can be considered "radiation" in how it's usually portrayed.
Versus what science tells us:
Call me old fashioned, but ten year study of 350,000 people trumps someone who imagines headaches from the WIFI at Starbucks.
Three Squirrels
> the photons emitted by cell phones are way too low in energy to do damage to molecules.
> Some guy named Einstein got a Noble Prize for that. For a brief explanation see
> http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/press.html .
Quoting:
"Our present exposure to man-made microwaves is about a m10^18 times greater than our nature exposure to these frequencies
"The main reaction why microwaves are especially damaging is probably because of the ease with which the current that they generate penetrate cell membranes. Cell membranes have a high resistance to DC, but, because they are so thin (about 10 nm), they behave like capacitors so that AC pass through them easily. Since the effective resistance of a capacitor is inversely proportional to its frequency, [currents induced by] microwave radiation pass through the membranes of cells and tissues more easily, than [currents induced by] lower frequency radio waves, and therefore they can do more damage to the cell contents.
"Since it has been known since the work of Bawin et al (1975) that weak electromagnetic fields could remove calcium ions from the surfaces of brain cells, it seems likely that both the conditioned water and the eletromagmentic fields were working in the same way, i.e., by removing structurally important calcium ions from cell membranes, which then made them leak.
"EM effects on the Endocrine System and Obesity ... after three months exposure to power-line frequencies, the thyroid glands of rats showed visible signs of deterioration.
[ More at http://tinyurl.com/2nfujj ]
Andrew Goldsworthy BSc, PhD
"Andrew Goldsworthy is an Honorary Lecturer in Biology at Imperial College London. He retired from full time teaching in 2004 but still gives occasional lectures there in specialist subjects such as food irradiation and the (exorbitant) energy cost of modern food production.
[http://www.radiationresearch.org/pdfs/cv/andrew_goldsworthy.pdf]
Untrue. Frequency matters a great deal. Take a look at page 3 of this guide from the FCC - the max power an amateur station can run without having to perform an evaluation bottoms out between 10m and the VHF band (that's 10m to 2m or 28-144 MHz for amateurs in the US).
This is the Q and A document. Page 7 describes Specific Absorption Rate, which is the frequency-dependent rate at which energy is absorbed by tissue.
From OET 65:
As indicated by Table 1
in Appendix A, the most restrictive limits occur in the frequency range of 30-300 MHz where
whole-body absorption of RF energy by human beings is most efficient. At other frequencies
whole-body absorption is less efficient, and, consequently, the MPE limits are less restrictive.
You realize, of course, that stepping out into bright sunlight exposes you to 100-120 times the extrapolated maximum RF exposure level of 1mW/cm^2? [Page 15 of the second doc - extrapolating the established constant limit of 1mW/cm^2 that's defined from 1500 to 100,000 MHz out to light].
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.