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.
The iPhone and the brain cancer debate.
- Thread starter Jade Cambell
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I can't, between the hacking whiners and now cell phones emit the same energy as atomic bombs. I can't help myself.
Please, there's no reason to be rude.
Sure, the OP may not fully understand the different frequencies of light and the dangers they may (or may not) cause, but that's not his/her fault. Unfortunately, false information on topics such as these is so common and widespread that you can no longer blame people for believing it - you can only blame the organizations spreading it, while trying to inform those who don't understand.
Now, you may think being rude helps, but it definitely doesn't (in fact, it has the opposite effect).
Sure, the OP may not fully understand the different frequencies of light and the dangers they may (or may not) cause, but that's not his/her fault. Unfortunately, false information on topics such as these is so common and widespread that you can no longer blame people for believing it - you can only blame the organizations spreading it, while trying to inform those who don't understand.
Now, you may think being rude helps, but it definitely doesn't (in fact, it has the opposite effect).
I was going to suggest that the most imminent danger from the iPhone is the number of people who appear to be three-seconds away from having a stroke (based on some of the heated responses in the hacking debate threads).
Even if I croak 10 years early from using an iPhone, I probably saved 5 years' time from not having to find a payphone, landline, telegraph machine, or web connected computer every time I needed to communicate or get some info.
Heck I live in NYC...land of the nasty payphone...who knows what disease I'd have by now if I'd been using payphones for the past several years?
Heck I live in NYC...land of the nasty payphone...who knows what disease I'd have by now if I'd been using payphones for the past several years?
What the FCC found a long time ago when researching cellphone freq strength was that all cell phones prior to the research had to be under a certain strength in order to get FCC approval. Even at that stronger strength cell phones will not give you brain cancer, it's just them being cautious.
You'll get far more of the cancer producing radiation by just going to work in the morning from the sun. So if you want to be skeptical about something you better start slathering on that sunscreen!
And please, enough of these bloody iPhone threads.
You'll get far more of the cancer producing radiation by just going to work in the morning from the sun. So if you want to be skeptical about something you better start slathering on that sunscreen!
And please, enough of these bloody iPhone threads.
And last I checked this was MacRumors as a whole. The site is flooded with iPhone BS right now. It's really getting old. In fact, I think I'll take a break from MR until everyone's had their fill. Later folks, the iPhone threads have officially flushed me out for a while.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if it bothers you enough to comment on it, responding to threads in the iPhone forum probably won't do much for your blood pressure.
Just a thought.
LOL. Dood ur ON the iPhone forum at MacRumors. You want us to stop talking iPhone on the IPHONE FORUM because it bothers you? Now I've seen everything.
Microwaves ARE considered RF. It's called "microwave" because of the short wavelengths - down to millimeters. (100GHz would be 3mm)
It is either a) the warmth of the phone or b) the position and pressure of your hand and fingers against the phone and/or your head. Any phone's going to make your hand go numb if you hold it long enough.
I know I shouldn't say it, but the way this thread started and the direction this question was going, I guess I need to: The phone is getting warm because it is doing work (just like any other electronic device) - NOT because microwaves are heating it.
So, what they say in those user guidelines is proof that there is in fact an issue here...
Thanks for all the responses. I still don't know for sure whether the earphones act as an antenna and transmit radio waves directly into my brain, but I can try and find that out on my own.
Debunked on "Brainiac" in the UK, and they had 100 cells, 50 phoning the other 50 which were surrounding the egg 360 degrees.
That is bull - Phones run at 0.01 watts - scary stuff.
It's no that simple. RF will wick out anywhere it can. Design of the jack and headset determine RF levels at the ear. That said, cellphones do not appear to cause cancer.
Agreed it isn't a simple "no".
My first response was "On the earphone question: The phone's designed so the RF doesn't appear in the audio output circuit or headphone."
I didn't want to exasperate the op's Q&A with a discussion of resonance, shielding, de-coupling, chokes, etc., etc., etc. and etc.
They don't have to specifically state it, anymore than they have to describe how they bond the touch surface to the glass (other than what's in the patents).
The statement "designed that way" is based on knowing they will start the product's design with best engineering practices. That includes getting the RF to the antenna and, at the same time, keeping it (and its harmonics) out of the rest of the phone's circuitry. Also, there are filters and shielding to prevent unwanted emissions from other sections of the phone (the various processors running at several hundred MHz, for example). This all means the majority of unwanted RF is kept from radiating outside the phone.
Obviously, this is a pretty simplistic description of how to design a cell phone (or any radio, for that matter). But, anything more detailed is way beyond the scope of this thread.
I'm afraid they did indeed know, and have always known. In fact, tests done since its invention in 1965 showed it caused cancer in rats, and until 1981 it was deemed illegal for human consumption by the US Food and Drug Administration.
So what made the US FDA change its mind in 1981? Somebody won an election in 1980. One of the very first things that somebody did after taking office was replace the FDA Commissioner with a man named Arthur Hayes on January 25, 1981 who promptly followed instructions and approved apsartame for human consumption a few months later.
Why? The President and CEO of the drug company which owned the patent to aspartame, G.D. Searle & Co, was a good friend of Ronald Reagan and the US Republican Party.
His name was Donald Rumsfeld. You may have heard of him.