Live data from Hacker News

A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

spectrum.ieee.org

51–60 of 171 posts

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#51
post #4

Testing phones from 5 millimeters away from the body may seem close, but for anyone carrying their phone in a pocket, the distance is closer to 2 millimeters. Because wireless power falls off exponentially with distance, what might be a safe amount of RF exposure at 5 millimeters could be much higher at 2 millimeters. They mean to say that you should expect a power about 6 times higher, (5^2 / 2^2). This is rubbish.…

Exactly. Near field electromagnetic variations are not inverse square.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#52
post #4

Testing phones from 5 millimeters away from the body may seem close, but for anyone carrying their phone in a pocket, the distance is closer to 2 millimeters. Because wireless power falls off exponentially with distance, what might be a safe amount of RF exposure at 5 millimeters could be much higher at 2 millimeters. They mean to say that you should expect a power about 6 times higher, (5^2 / 2^2). This is rubbish.…

Why isn't it tested at 2mm if that is the standard useage? Why rely on a model? 20,000 phones are being sold an hour. Why not buy 200 phone's off 200 shelves and test them comprehensively at 0 mm, 1mm, 2mm, 3mm ..... The cost to volume sold is completely negligible and it is useful consumer information as 3 percent of the population is electrosensitive. An estimated 30 million people suffer from Myalgic Encephalomyel…

> Turn your wifi off in your house at night and see if you sleep any better.

This needs to be a blind test, e.g. you track your sleep quality over a longer period of time while a script turns wifi off on random nights.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#53
post #6

> The SAR limit is primarily concerned with a phone’s thermal effects—essentially, the power is limited to 1.6 W/kg to ensure that no one is burned by using their phone. I should be worried about the heat generated from my phone? I thought maybe there was some issue with RF and my cells, but this seems like a complete nonissue to me. Am I being foolish for writing this off? The only time my phone is going to burn me…

Sunlight shining on one side of a cube-shaped liter of flesh would be 10W/kg or so on average (and about 100W/kg if we consider the top 1cm). 1.6W/kg is a conservative limit.

I'd sure hope the exposure is orders of magnitude less than sunlight, considering how clear the dangers of sunlight are.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#54
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sunlight shining on one side of a cube-shaped liter of flesh would be 10W/kg or so on average (and about 100W/kg if we consider the top 1cm). 1.6W/kg is a conservative limit.

Yeah, but it is important to consider the wavelength. Did our cells evolve to handle constant RF exposure?

It's not really relevant for non-ionizing radiation such as RF, as the primary impact on our cells from RF is just heat.

And the thing to know about evolution and life is that life evolved to be robust in the face of changes and different environments.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#55
post #4

Testing phones from 5 millimeters away from the body may seem close, but for anyone carrying their phone in a pocket, the distance is closer to 2 millimeters. Because wireless power falls off exponentially with distance, what might be a safe amount of RF exposure at 5 millimeters could be much higher at 2 millimeters. They mean to say that you should expect a power about 6 times higher, (5^2 / 2^2). This is rubbish.…

Why isn't it tested at 2mm if that is the standard useage? Why rely on a model? 20,000 phones are being sold an hour. Why not buy 200 phone's off 200 shelves and test them comprehensively at 0 mm, 1mm, 2mm, 3mm ..... The cost to volume sold is completely negligible and it is useful consumer information as 3 percent of the population is electrosensitive. An estimated 30 million people suffer from Myalgic Encephalomyel…

Electrosensitivity is not a thing.

It's a disorder made up by hypochondriacs. If you said 3 percent of the population are hypochondriacs then I would believe you.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#56
post #34
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people do believe that non ionizing radiation has effects other than those produced by the added thermal energy (or that the thermal effects are in some way significant). The actual scientific evidence for this is minimal though.

> Some people do believe that non ionizing radiation has effects other than those produced by the added thermal energy Some people believe vaccines cause Down's Syndrome. "Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are…

"If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus."

Appears to contradict

"What is relevant is reproducible results."

Aren't reproducible results a form of consensus?

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#57

In my case the phone has never been in my pocket while in use. The phone may occasionally ping the cell tower. Otherwise it is just listening in standby mode, in plain words, not transmitting. The premise of the article is weak. In my opinion the article was not suitably vetted by Spectrum .

Plenty of people use hand-free devices with their phones in their pockets. Many others hold the phone against their head when talking on it. Additionally, there are many network-intensive applications which can be used while the phone is in your pocket, i.e. mobile hotspot.

Probably the least common scenario is for a phone to be transmitting at full power when it's not in close contact with a human.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#58
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people do believe that non ionizing radiation has effects other than those produced by the added thermal energy Some people believe vaccines cause Down's Syndrome. "Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are…

"If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus." Appears to contradict "What is relevant is reproducible results." Aren't reproducible results a form of consensus?

> Aren't reproducible results a form of consensus?

Not in the least. "Reproducible results" represents the technical and methodological ability to confirm that an effect is real. "Consensus" is whether a political body is willing to admit that the effect is real.

And we all know politics finds truth to be...

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#59

my father occupationally used to measure RF output from mountaintop cell repeaters. he was always pushing back on operators for pushing just a little outside the limits so they could pick up more calls.

I always assumed the phone to tower path would be the limit, not the tower to phone.

Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit

#60
post #6

> The SAR limit is primarily concerned with a phone’s thermal effects—essentially, the power is limited to 1.6 W/kg to ensure that no one is burned by using their phone. I should be worried about the heat generated from my phone? I thought maybe there was some issue with RF and my cells, but this seems like a complete nonissue to me. Am I being foolish for writing this off? The only time my phone is going to burn me…

The total energy capacity of your phones battery is clearly the limit of the output of the device. It's not much. The iPhone 11 is 7 watt hours, so 25 kilojoule. Wolfram alpha helpfully tells me this is about the same energy as burning 0.64 grams of coal or 0.66 grams of human fat.

7 watt hours is an insanely damaging amount! Basically a 7 watt bulb next to you for an hour, or exposure to a 70 watt bulb (that would cause third degree burns in seconds) for six minutes. Yes the peak output of a phone is less than 70 watt but you can do a lot of damage with that much energy.
Post reply on HN