💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 2498.gmi captured on 2023-11-14 at 12:11:38. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2023-01-29)

➡️ Next capture (2024-05-10)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Is Putting a Cell Phone in Your Pocket a Health Risk?

2010-10-26 14:58:57

By MICHAEL SCHERER / WASHINGTON Michael Scherer / Washington Tue Oct 26, 2:20

am ET

We are a nation grown numb to the seemingly endless fine print that accompanies

our purchases. But every now and then a product is sold with a warning that

should command attention. Consider the little-noticed bit of legalese that

comes in the safety manual for Apple's iPhone 4: "When using iPhone near your

body for voice calls or for wireless data transmission over a cellular network,

keep iPhone at least 15 mm (5/8 inch) away from the body, and only use carrying

cases, belt clips, or holders that do not have metal parts and that maintain at

least 15 mm (5/8 inch) separation between iPhone and the body," the warning

reads.

Similar warnings against carrying cellular and smart phones in a closely sewn

pocket show up throughout the industry. The safety manual for Research in

Motion's BlackBerry 9000 phone tells users that they may violate Federal

Communications Commission (FCC) guidelines for radio-frequency energy exposure

by carrying the phone outside a holster and within 0.98 inches (2.5 cm) of

their body. The safety manual of the Motorola W180 phone tells users to always

keep the active device one full inch away from their body, if not using a

company-approved "clip, holder, holster, case or body harness."

Skeptics of the safety of cellular phones have seized upon these warnings as

evidence that the ubiquitous devices may be exposing Americans to far more

radiation than regulators measure. "Nobody is watching," says Devra Davis, the

author of a new book called Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation,

What the Industry Has Done to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family. "Is the

law broken if something is so complicated that nobody notices?"

The answer, like the fine-print warnings themselves, is complicated, and likely

has as much to do with corporate concerns over legal compliance as it does with

health, given the current body of scientific knowledge. "The companies want to

legally protect themselves," says Robert Cleveland Jr., a former FCC official

who worked on setting the current cellular-phone radio-frequency standard.

The warnings stem from an odd quirk in federal testing procedures designed to

ensure the safety of cellular phones. In 2001, the FCC released a set of

guidelines for manufacturers that required all cell phones sold in the U.S. to

emit a specific absorption rate (SAR) of not more than 1.6 watts of

radio-frequency energy per kilogram of body tissue, a standard deemed safe

given the state of scientific knowledge about thermal harm from radio-frequency

waves. The standard was considered a so-called worst-case scenario, accounting

for the energy emitted when the phone was transmitting at full power all of its

various signals - such as Bluetooth, wi-fi and cellular.

But the FCC testing regulations notably chose not to simulate a situation in

which the phone was broadcasting at full power while inside a shirt or pants

pocket flush against the body, an odd oversight given the known habits of many

cellular-phone users. As a matter of physics, radio-frequency energy generally

increases sharply as distance is reduced. "The exposure is definitely related

to distance," says Cleveland.

According to the 2001 FCC guidelines, testing of the device in a "body-worn"

configuration should be done with the device in a belt clip or holster. If a

belt clip or holster was not supplied with the phone, the FCC told testers to

assume a separation distance of between 0.59 inches and 0.98 inches (1.5 cm to

2.5 cm) from the body during a test.

"Clearly if it's tested in a holster, it's only guaranteed to be compliant if

it's used with a holster," says one current FCC official familiar with these

issues, who asked not to be identified by name. "Clearly a lot of people

weren't aware of this, and it probably does need to be addressed." Some phones

come with a holster included, while others, including Apple's iPhone 4, are not

sold with holsters.

Read "How Safe Is Your Cell Phone?

See a photographic history of the cell phone.

A spokeswoman for Apple, Natalie Harrison, provided a statement in response to

questions about the iPhone warning. "iPhone's radio-frequency energy is well

within the limits set by the Federal Communications Commission of the U.S.,

Industry Canada of Canada and other countries," she said. Representatives for

Motorola and Research in Motion did not respond to requests for comment.

John Walls, a spokesman for CTIA, a trade group representing the wireless

industry, confirmed that the warnings arose from the FCC testing guidance.

"Because they test at the waist in the holster, any reference to use guidelines

or advice incorporates the buffer the holster provides," Wall wrote in an

e-mail to TIME)

So should you be worried about putting your phone in your pocket? The answer

depends largely on how much faith you put in the current state of scientific

research about radio-frequency energy.

Both U.S. and international regulatory bodies like the World Health

Organization have found that available scientific evidence does not demonstrate

an increased health risk due to the radiation that is emitted by cellular

phones. But these statements, which are based on large studies looking for

increases in conditions like brain cancer, do not rule out the possibility that

future studies might reach a different conclusion, as more data is collected

over longer periods of time and the general use of cellular phones increases)

The FCC notes on its websites that studies linking radio-frequency exposure and

cancer "have been inconclusive." The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which

has primary responsibility for monitoring the health science of cellular

phones, has stated that it cannot rule out the possibility of a health risk

from phones, but if such a risk exists, "it is probably small." One recent

study found that people who used their phones most often and for the longest

period of time - 30 minutes a day or more on average for at least 10 years -

had a substantially higher risk of developing some form of brain cancer, but

the study also found that those who rarely used cellular phones had a lower

risk than those who used only corded phones.

The FDA recommends that those concerned about these health risks can either

reduce the amount of time spent using a cell phone or "use speaker mode or a

headset to place more distance between your head and the cell phone." If using

a hands-free headset, the FDA recommends keeping a distance between your phone

and your body, either by holding the phone in your hand, where it is likely to

be less of a hazard, or in an approved body-worn accessory like a holster.

Given the current testing guidelines, it is impossible to know if any phone

currently sold in the U.S. would exceed 1.6 watts per kilogram if worn in a

pocket flush with the skin, or by how much. But the fine-print warnings suggest

manufacturers are aware of the possibility. The BlackBerry 9000 warning, for

instance, states that users should "use only accessories equipped with an

integrated belt clip that are supplied or approved by Research In Motion" to

"maintain compliance" with FCC guidelines.

In a recent update to its online advisory on cell-phone radiation, the FCC

noted, "Many people mistakenly assume that using a cell phone with a lower

reported SAR value necessarily decreases a user's exposure to RF emissions, or

is somehow 'safer' than using a cell phone with a high SAR value."

The posting went on to explain that any given phone could have several

different emissions levels in various configurations, and that FCC testing is

only designed to ensure that the phone does not exceed 1.6 watts per kilogram

of exposure in a "most severe, worst case (and highest power) operating

conditions." The Web posting, however, did not explain why FCC testing fails to

account for the worst-case (and quite common) scenario of a cell-phone user who

wears a phone against the skin inside a pocket.