Debate on Cell Phone Radiation Continues
EarthTalk®
From the Editors of E/The Environmental Magazine
Dear EarthTalk: OK, so are cell phones emitting dangerous radiation or not? If so, which phones are safer that others and what do we do to minimize exposure? -- Luke Alderman, Santa Fe, NM
The jury is still out as to whether or not the radiation emitted by cell phones can cause negative health effects for callers. Mobile phones emit signals to communicate with cellular towers via radio waves, which are comprised of radio-frequency (RF) energy, a form of electromagnetic radiation.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) limits the amount of radiation any phone sold in the U.S. can emit to what it considers a safe level of 1.6 watts per kilogram of body weight (a measure of the energy absorbed by the body when using a wireless device). But some health practitioners are concerned that even this level of exposure may be too high, resulting in people unwittingly exposing themselves to potentially harmful radiation every time they make or take a call.
Such radiation is known to heat up living tissue it comes into close contact with by a fraction of a degree, but this level of temperature increase is less than that caused by exposure to direct sunlight, and the brain’s blood circulation typically disperses this excess heat quickly by increasing local blood flow.
Some recent studies have found higher risks for brain and salivary gland tumors among people using cell phones for 10 years or longer, while other research has found little if any risk. Other research has looked at the reproductive, cognitive and sleep effects of RF energy at levels similar to what cell/smart phones emit. Results have been mixed. More studies are now underway to resolve whether or not cell phones are safe for people to use, but some electronics manufacturers aren’t waiting around to cut down on the radiation emissions of the phones they make and sell.
If you are in the market for a new cell phone, check out the nonprofit Environmental Working Group’s (EWG’s) rundown on which of the thousand or so popular cell/smart phone models give off the most and least radiation. Levels vary widely, from as little as 0.3 to the legal limit of 1.6 watts per kilogram of body weight. Sanyo’s Katana II, Samsung’s Rugby, Nokia’s 7710, and the Blackberry Storm, among others, get top marks from EWG for giving off lower amounts of radiation (in the 0.3 range). Meanwhile, more than a dozen different cell/smart phones (including some of the most popular models such as Motorola’s Droid, Blackberry’s Bold 9700, LG’s Chocolate Touch and HTC’s Nexus One by Google) are categorized as “worst” by EWG for giving off larger amounts of radiation (pushing the 1.6 limit). Apple’s iPhone 3Gs is in the middle of the spectrum, leaking between 0.52 and 1.19, depending on usage.
Regardless of which cell/smart phone you use, you can minimize your exposure to RF radiation by taking a few simple precautions. For one, using a headset (these give off significantly less radiation) or speaker phone keeps the phone itself away from your head. Also, your phone emits far less radiation when used to text instead of call—and the phone isn’t next to your brain when texting—so the more you tap (just not while driving, please!) instead of talk the better. Also, a poor signal (fewer bars) means that your phone has to work harder—and emit more radiation—to connect up to a wireless tower, so wait to make that call until you are somewhere with a stronger connection.
SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk®, c/o E – The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. E is a nonprofit publication. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe; Request a Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.
Related Posts:
2 Responses »
Leave a Response
Entries(RSS)
The jury is NOT still out!
The harmful effects of microwave radiation have been known and extensively studied for sixty five years. See http://www.bioinitiative.org for the scientific information.
There is far more evidence that microwave radiation is harmful, than there is for cigarette smoking.
For more information you can search: Microwave Sickness, or the Health Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation.
The evidence is there, you just need to look for it.
The microwave-brain tumor question is a total red herring that, if the public is dumb enough to keep buying it, will prevent any progress from being made on the issue for decades. It was discovered during WW II that microwaves could cause all sorts of strange health problems among radar operators, even at sub-thermal power densities (i.e. at power densities lower than those required to literally cook flesh, which is what current "safety" standards are based on). Some of the more cruel operators even entertained themselves by using their equipment to shoot birds from the sky. The fact of microwaves ability to interfere with proper functioning of biological systems was exploited by both sides throughout the cold war–the Soviets even went so far as to bombard the US embassy with microwaves, and successfully caused a lot of bizarre health issues for State Dept. workers, including cancer.
There is an entire stealth-warfare industry, born after WW II, which manufactures products designed to interfere with basic biological functions by using low-power microwaves. One guy who worked for the British government on microwave warfare in the 60's and 70's has even been nice enough to summarize the effects of different modulation frequencies on people and post them in an open letter (available at http://weepnews.blogspot.com/2009/01/open-letter-open-letter-from-barrie.html).
The point here is that we've known for a long time that microwaves harm living things, even at low power. The telecom industry can pay large numbers of highly-credentialed scientists to say otherwise, but that's not really the point (see also: tobacco, asbestos). The technology has already found innumerable military applications, and the "soft-kill" industry continues to grow to this day. Why exactly the microwave band was deemed a good idea to deploy for global telecommunications is anybody's guess, but it definitely wasn't out of ignorance of the effects that such frequencies can have on living systems.