Posted 06.16.2010 at 2:36 pm
4 Comments
Electro-Magnetic Model
Electro-magnetic waves from the phone’s antenna penetrate the brain several centimeters deep.
Paul Wootton
Never mind that the largest study ever conducted on the cell phone-cancer link found that your cell phone addiction isn't increasing your risk of cancer. San Francisco voted yesterday requiring that all cell phones sold in the city display the amount of radiation they emit.
The law requires that retailers post the specific absorption rate (SAR) -- the amount of radio waves absorbed into the user's body -- next to all phones in no less than 11-point type. Those absorption rates do vary from phone to phone, but while some scientific anomalies exist in rare cases there's no scientific evidence suggesting that SAR has any bearing on one's health or cancer risk. In fact, some studies have suggested cell phone radiation reverses Alzheimer's (in mice, anyhow).
Related Articles
 | The Man Who Was Allergic to Radio Waves |
 | Largest-Ever Study On Cancer and Cellphones Finds "No Increase in Risk" |
 | Cell Phone Radiation Reverses Alzheimer's and Boosts Memory in Mice |
Tags
Technology, Clay Dillow, cancer, cell phone radiation, cellphones, health, radiation, san franciscoThe FCC requires phones sold in the U.S. to have an SAR of no more than 1.6 watts per kilogram. Does the average person really know what to do with that number? Sure, this labeling will help consumers comparison shop so they can best protect themselves from a threat that may or may not exist. But it seems like this law is a bit pointless unless it's coupled with an education campaign that explains to consumers exactly what SAR numbers mean to their health. And since science is still deliberating just exactly what it means, this legislation seems a bit superfluous.
4 Comments
To comment, please Login.
Popular Tags
Science
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 2013: The Future Of Flight
The incredible innovations, like drone swarms and perpetual flight, bringing aviation into the world of tomorrow. Plus: today's greatest sci-fi writers predict the future, the science behind the summer's biggest blockbusters, a Doctor Who-themed DIY 'bot, the organs you can do without, and much more.
.jpg)
Popular on Popsci
Most Commented
Technology
- Green Light For Plan To Build World's Tallest Building At Record Speed
- Why The U.S. Won't Dare Kill Edward Snowden With A Drone Strike
- Counterpoint: The U.S. Could Totally Kill Edward Snowden With A Drone Strike
- U.S. Government Uses Early Knowledge Of Microsoft Bugs For Spying
- Congress Was Not Really Briefed On PRISM
- A Concise History Of The NSA's Online Spying Program PRISM
- Who's More Powerful, China Or The United States? [Infographic]
- Why Government Phone Spying Is Really About Big Data
- Watch This Insane Helicopter-Bike Fly Around
- Designers Spruce Up The Government's Crappy PowerPoint
Most Emailed
Technology
- Scenes From Asia's First 3-D-Printed Fashion Show
- A 3-D Printed Fashion Show Inspired By Birds
- Counterpoint: The U.S. Could Totally Kill Edward Snowden With A Drone Strike
- How Surveillance Has Evolved In The United States [Timeline]
- A Brief History Of The Demise Of Battle Bots
- Nursing Home Tracks Residents' Every Move
- Researchers Can Now "Hear" The Exact Shape Of A Room
- Designers Make City Noise Actually Sound Good
- All Of America's Waterways On One Map [Infographic]
- The 6 Most Important Things We Learned From Edward Snowden's Guardian Q&A
Most Viewed
Technology
- Scenes From Asia's First 3-D-Printed Fashion Show
- A 3-D Printed Fashion Show Inspired By Birds
- Counterpoint: The U.S. Could Totally Kill Edward Snowden With A Drone Strike
- How Surveillance Has Evolved In The United States [Timeline]
- A Brief History Of The Demise Of Battle Bots
- Nursing Home Tracks Residents' Every Move
- Researchers Can Now "Hear" The Exact Shape Of A Room
- Designers Make City Noise Actually Sound Good
- All Of America's Waterways On One Map [Infographic]
- The 6 Most Important Things We Learned From Edward Snowden's Guardian Q&A
Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email
Contributing Writers:
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email
Today on PopSci.com
.JPG)
Copyright © 2012 Popular Science
A Bonnier Corporation Company. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Every politician should have at least a minor in Physical Sciences before they can qualify for election. Politicians are notorious for feeding off the perceived public fear.
The following book is a MUST read.
Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives by Michael Specter
http://amzn.com/1594202303
Leave it to San Francisco to ignore common sense
i missed from the article how can companies count the SAR. I've found it: It can be calculated from the electric field within the tissue as:(σ*E)/ ρ
σ is the sample electrical conductivity
E is the RMS electric field
ρ is the sample density
See Hungary: www.hungriabonita.com/hungria
"Every politician should have at least a minor in Physical Sciences before they can qualify for election."
And computer science
And genetics
And psychology
... I could go on and on. I'd be happy to get one that reads a book every now and then. My Digital Crime professor told me about a case he worked on trying to get a search warrant for a sex offense involving child pornography. The judge said the proposition was not specific enough. When they started talking about disk imaging and processing in a 50-page proposition, he said, "Uhhh.... Let me have the 12-page version back."