Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Chicago Tribune Claims iPhone Radiofrequency Radiation Levels Measured Higher Than Legal Safety Limit in Tests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Since iPhones are considered a premium phone the Radiofrequency Radiation iPhones reproduce is the best most pure Radiofrequency Radiation you can buy. Much better than Samsung or Motorolla. I would never give up Apple's Radiofrequency Radiation because it blends seamlessly into Apple's "Eco system".
If you can't afford Apples Radiofrequency Radiation maybe you should look elsewhere. Samsung's Radiofrequency Radiation will slow down your phone and they never update their Radiofrequency Radiation.
If you can't afford Apples Radiofrequency Radiation maybe you should look elsewhere. Samsung's Radiofrequency Radiation will slow down your phone and they never update their Radiofrequency Radiation.
So which iPhones are in the clear? How does the SE fare? I don’t have access to the article as I live in EU.
And the way they were tested somehow makes it less serious for Apple? Any phone giving off Radiofrequency Radiation should be a cause of concern. But Samsung is the bad guy right?
Maybe, but your skin is green. Hulk smash!!!I have been using transmitters for 50 years at 1,000 watts out. Ain't dead yet!
Way late back to this thread, but the answer is yes. Public safety bodies will accept manufacturers’ assertion that the device is compliant when they provide a certified iso compliant third-party SAR assessment. These reports are very carefully scrutinized for errors or misinterpretations of data (it happens, I’ve seen clear fails marked as passes when you can see it right in their own graph - oops!). Public safety bodies will also conduct their own internal testing on new devices as availability of test equipment allows. These tests are also carried out on shipping samples purchased from a variety of source (they order five phones from five different stores). This is known as market surveillance.
Oh and to your first question, I believe the standard is in fact 10mm.
[doublepost=1566449299][/doublepost]
we took our guidance from Health Canada and I believe their margin was/is “fifty times safe”.
you have the right idea, but there are no special “test” edition phones or firmware. Cell devices transmit at the power that the base station tells them to. So the test BS forces max power mode on the phone for the duration of the test, despite being right next to it. All evaluations are tests of the “worst case” scenario.
I did some looking and I think for FCC Part 15 you do want firmware to make it run at max blast then you look at conducted and radiated emissions, but it does seem that as you say for SAR you use a base station simulator.
But I think there are some things you have to set up on the phone which may be difficult. For example, you have to make sure Wi-Fi and cellular are fully transferring at the same time (the certification docs mention a hotspot mode) and I wouldn't be surprised if there was power coordination between the functions.
The alleged violation isn't for holding it up to your head, its for when your phone is in the pocket. Actually, voice transmissions take very little power, the phone is sending about 48 kbps, versus maximum data uploads of maybe 30 Mbps. A simple ratio suggests that voice calls would emit much less than 1% of the power of data.
If you don't want Radiofrequency Radiation why do even you have a phone?
The scientific consensus is that radiofrequency radiation is not dangerous but more studies are being done. Currently, there isn't even a single THEORY on how radiofrequency radiation would affect cells in a human body. That means that this radiation is probably harmless.
Just for basic understanding: There is ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation. So if radiofrequency radiation (which is non-ionizing radiation) affects us humans, how?! It doesn't exchange electrons at all with anything. It just makes something warmer. Like a microwave. That's why we have these strict (very strict!!!) safety limits for this radiation - you know - so it doesn't cook our brains. A Wi-Fi Access Point produces more radiofrequency radiation than a mobile phone on your ear or in your pocket. So go figure...
Okay, so the FCC and all international regulation authorities + Apple themselves just slept on this and the Chicago Tribune managed to find this safety limit violation in the most successful mobile phone out there?
Yeah, sure.
I would bet the setup their contracted lab used wasn't the same that's used for the standardized tests, as a ton of phones violated the safety limits in their test, which seems highly unlikely.
Yeah, sure.
I would bet the setup their contracted lab used wasn't the same that's used for the standardized tests, as a ton of phones violated the safety limits in their test, which seems highly unlikely.
Last edited:
Watts is power, Joules is energy. Watts per kilogram is a power density measurement. Subtract the power dissipation, multiply by time, and divide by specific heat to get the temperature change.
The SAR limit is 1.6W/kg averaged over 1g of tissue (presumably mostly water).
Why do people think that if they don’t understand something, it must be wrong?
I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic and I’m being gullible, but it sounds like you think your logic leads to your conclusion.
First, the sunshine isn't really much stronger than the SAR limit and it can be quite harmful— not because of the ionizing effects of UV, but because of the thermal loading causing various organs to malfunction (ie. heat stroke) with only a few degrees of internal temperature rise.
That's not the real comparable here though. SAR testing is less worried about raising your body temp and more worried about overheating sensitive tissues. Heat stroke is relatively uncommon because our bodies try to regulate their internal temperature and sweat to evaporatively cool-- we mostly get into trouble when those systems fail.
SAR testing is more worried about tissue that doesn't dissipate heat well-- like your eyes. There's a reason why we don't worry too much about going out in the sun, but all know not to stare at it. It's because that same radiation source that our backs and bellies can absorb just fine can be quite damaging to our eyes even after fairly brief exposure-- our eyes don't dissipate heat well, and staring at the sun cooks them.
The sun at noon is about 1kW per square meter. In broad daylight, our pupils are about 2mm in diameter-- so our eyes admit about 1e3*π*0.001^2= about 3mW. About half of that light makes it to the retina, or about 1.5mW. That's not much different than the 1.6mW averaged over a gram of tissue and it will cause significant eye damage.
Your eye won't detect radio and remind you to look away. Since it's the reactive magnetic near field, your eyelid won't block it.
The megawatt TV tower at the end of your block has lower power densities than the sunlight just discussed when you're 9 meters away from it (Surface area of a sphere of radius 9m is approx 1000 square meters, one megawatt distributed over a 1000 square meters is 1kW/square meter).
And again, the TV tower is predominantly electric far field, so not very good at penetrating water in the same way that the magnetic near field measured by SAR testing is.
Last edited:
I think a phone that doesn't give out Radiofrequency radiation will not be a phone
The joke would have been better if you didn't write out radiation..
Based on the likes... people do care Good to have a view from someone with inside experience.
Good to have a view from someone with inside experience.
If I had to guess - Apple is probably doing some “tricks” to reduce output - something like simply using the ambient light sensor to determine if it is near your body (Either while on a call near your head, or in a pocket) and if so then lower radio output power (If possible given signal strength). Then testing this screen on under full load produces extreme results like this.
I don’t know and frankly I’m not worried. Has their been any studies suggest BT aka 900 mhz causes brain cancer?
Not sure anyone would want to be "that guy" having a conversation on speaker whilst out in public...
I don't understand comments like this. Do you always walk around with airpods in, even at work or do you subject everyone else to both sides of your conversation too?
No, only millenial's and clueless gen X'ers walk around with their air pods in all day. Being that the actual "phone feature" doesn't get much use on my phone it's a non-issue.
When I do have a lengthy call, I simply take out and use my air pods nothing to it at all.