Phone manufacturers may soon be required to place radiation warning labels on their products
However, this is not the full extent of the Cell Phone Right to Know Act. It would also create a new national research program that will be studying the effects of cell phones on health. Plus, it will require the Environmental Protection Agency to update its quite outdated SAR ratings (Specific Absorption Rate). All of this aims to let users know that while there isn't a proven link between cell phone radiation and brain cancer, there might be such.
We'd like to remind our readers that no conclusive statement can be made yet, as to whether or not cell phones have negative impact on human health. Research in this area is still ongoing and there's good amount of possibility that it may take at least a few years until such a conclusion can be made.
source: DennisKucinich via Cnet
1. chemhaz (Posts: 148; Member since: 04 May 2012)
Good new, iDiots can see how much their beloved device is causing them harm if this article is truehttp://www.phonearena.com/news
/Apple-iPhone-emits-three-time-the-radiation-as-the-Samsung-Galaxy-S-I II_id32498/comments/page/2?ratelimit=all&sort=thre aded
2. andro. (Posts: 1926; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
Agreed Apple will get their legal teams and 'political acquaintances' to fight this as stats made public will show the iphone in a very bad light again.
10. sgtdisturbed47 (Posts: 111; Member since: 02 Feb 2012)
We can all just wear tin foil hats.
3. dragonscourgex (Posts: 307; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
A waste of government money and time.
7. dl20155 (Posts: 1; Member since: 07 Aug 2012)
It doesn't your money and time but government's.
12. phonemonkey (Posts: 150; Member since: 13 Feb 2012)
could you make this statement make more sense?
17. corps1089 (Posts: 492; Member since: 20 Jan 2010)
I think dl20155 was trying to say it isn't your money and time, its the government's.
Time is money, so its just a matter of money.
Of course, dl20155 would be flat out wrong since by definition the government's money is our money. The goverment has its sanction from the people and its money from the people, and the 100% obligation to not waste either where the people do not wish it.
18. dragonscourgex (Posts: 307; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
Sadly people like you draw breath. Yes it is my money and time. It is our tax dollars that they are spending. The government of the USA is suppose to be "for the people, by the people" The people in office are "suppose" to be a voice of the people. They are "suppose" to listen to what their districts are saying and vote accordingly. So, like I said, it is a waste of money and time. Even thou you and the 8 others do not agree with me.
4. droidnator (Posts: 86; Member since: 10 Mar 2011)
I for one applaud the idea. Public health should be a priority, and mobiles are a big part of our life nowadays. We should know the truth - are they bad for us or not, conclusively.
5. superguy (Posts: 263; Member since: 15 Jul 2011)
A couple things.
All eletromagnetic energy are radiation of some sort. So radio, microwaves, visible light, etc are all type s of radiation. There are also two types of radiation - ionizing and non-ionizing. Ionizing radiation like x-rays can cause cancer. Non-ionizing radiation doesn't. Also, once you get into UV and above, the higher the frequency, the more dangerous it can be (i.e. X-rays are considered to be more dangerous than UV rays).
One of my physics professors laughed at the notion that these were dangerous. He stated that the average person puts out enough infrared energy to power a 900W infrared light bulb constantly. It's ridiculous to be worried about a
6. ghostkilla1388 (Posts: 50; Member since: 11 Jun 2012)
A person can emit infrared energy? also to power a light bulb...
lol you mad electric companies lol
Ill have to read up on that sounds very interesting superguy!
19. Saving_your_Butt (Posts: 2; Member since: 04 Nov 2011)
ummm, yes people do emit infared energy. In fact, you don't have to do anything to do it too! just sit on your butt and you emit it. Infared imagery shows contrast in heat being emitted by an object or living being.
14. Scott_H (Posts: 167; Member since: 28 Oct 2011)
Almost any physics professor would laugh at the idea that cell radiation could harm you - non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation can't cause cancer, period.
It's conceivable that the heat emitted could have some effect, but this is true for any device that gives off heat.
8. shuaibhere (Posts: 685; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)
if this is the case apple will be the bug loser..
9. shuaibhere (Posts: 685; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)
if this is the case.....apple will be the big
11. Stoli89 (Posts: 333; Member since: 28 Jun 2010)
Except of course in Japan, where your handset rad level will remain below the country's post-Fukushima background radiation levels.
13. phonemonkey (Posts: 150; Member since: 13 Feb 2012)
I have family that lives in japan and quite frankly i find this offensive
Thank you for being more considerate and less indifferent.
15. corps1089 (Posts: 492; Member since: 20 Jan 2010)
We'd like to remind our readers that no conclusive statement can be made yet, as to whether or not congressional membership has negative impact on human stupidity. Research in this area is still ongoing and there's good amount of possibility that it may take at least a few billion years until such a conclusion can be made.
16. corps1089 (Posts: 492; Member since: 20 Jan 2010)
Careful Ray S., your choice of words could have been better in that last sentance:
"there's good amount of possibility that" is just poor grammer,
"until such a conclusion can be made" could be interpreted as meaning: until we reach the foregone conclusion...