Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 171 posts

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

#71

Post by meekstro »

meekstro wrote: post #63
bananabreakfast wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Electrosensitivity is denied by intelligent healthy people who have never dealt with unexplainable fatigue relying on statistics and body system diagnosis that is inadequate for explaining chronic complex health conditions. They're all just whinging man. Not one of them ever hoped it was all in their head and they could think their way out of it. Hacker News is a perfect subset of people lacking the perspective to co…

Here's the reason.

Serum ferritin is an accute phase reactant that elevates due to inflammation from acute and sometimes chronic illness or heritable genetic mutation.

When someone is ill and inflamed and fatigued and they have excess serum ferritin circulating in their blood which contains 4500 iron atoms per molecule and absorbs electromagnetic radiation it interferes with their biochemistry.

Why people scoff at investigating the prevalence of electromagnetic radiation exposure when there is a causative mechanism for elevated risk in sick people is because of either arrogance or ignorance. Maybe if the doctors listened to patients instead of diagnosing hypochondria when dealing with edge cases health outcomes would begin to actually you know improve.

This is Iranian research. So what. They have brilliant scientists. Serum ferritin absorbs and is affected by electromagnetic radiation and is highly elevated in sick people. As my serum ferritin has reduced from 1200 to under 310 through venesection and lifestyle I have gradually been able tolerate exposure to electromagnetic radiation without being fatigued by it for extended periods. People running a daily energy budget become pretty adept at working out what burns through their energy and electromagnetic radiation exposure definitely does and bored sick people definitely want to use wireless devices but can't. The hypochondria diagnosis is illogical when it comes to electrosensititivity.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662108/

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

#72

Post by johnr2 »

madengr wrote: post #44
jws wrote: 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.…

Well you are in the reactive near-field, so the antenna will de-tune, hence the power amplifier won't see it's ideal match, and not deliver as much power. All depends on antenna design and orientation, assuming they don't use active impedance tuning. The base station also tells the phone to back-off. If the TX were running at full power, the battery will die quickly. Leave your phone in a metal, security cubby and yo…

> RF burns are a right of passage for PA designers, and are harmless as it's the outer skin layers.

A literal example of skin effect?

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

#73

Post by pbhjpbhj »

gus_massa wrote: post #62
mopsi wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

And you cover the green leds with tape mask, or get version with an accurate fake blinking patterns.

My ISP supplied router has an option to turn the lights off, which is great as otherwise it illuminates the whole hallway. I don't get why electronics makers think their product needs to have such bright lights.

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

#74

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #73
gus_massa wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you cover the green leds with tape mask, or get version with an accurate fake blinking patterns.

My ISP supplied router has an option to turn the lights off, which is great as otherwise it illuminates the whole hallway. I don't get why electronics makers think their product needs to have such bright lights.

Simple. The engineers are working on the product during the day in well-lit spaces. Since the lights are always on, it never occurs to anyone that the LEDs might be too bright at night.

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

#75

Post by [deleted] »

avian wrote: post #47
jcims wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4676010/ Essentially EM fields alternating in the low to medium frequency bands (~100khz-1mhz) can disrupt cell processes by physically jiggling the polar molecules that make up portions of miotic spindles/microtubules. Among presumably other things this effect is being investigated as a cancer fighting mechanism called 'tumor treating fields'. The carrier frequency of mob…

If your phone emits any non-trivial amounts of RF power at 100 kHz-1MHz frequencies, regardless of whether this comes from intermodulation products or something else, it doesn't pass existing EMC regulations and can't be legally sold to consumers. This is something that is already (or should be, in theory) rigorously tested for everything that's put on the consumer market (from your cheapest USB charger to your iPhon…

[deleted]

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

#76

Post by deftnerd »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #73
gus_massa wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you cover the green leds with tape mask, or get version with an accurate fake blinking patterns.

My ISP supplied router has an option to turn the lights off, which is great as otherwise it illuminates the whole hallway. I don't get why electronics makers think their product needs to have such bright lights.

In a bright environment, a bright LED is useful. Instead they should also have a light sensor used to determine the ambient light level, and then adjust the status LED display accordingly. My Samsung TV does this with its "powered on" light.

Of course, that adds to the BOM and manufacturers love shaving off fractions of a penny. Asking them to add an extra 50 cents of parts for something consumers don't think about prior to purchase is a lost cause.

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

#77

Post by meekstro »

mopsi wrote: post #52
meekstro wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You could just try it. Turn off the electrical stuff before you go to bed but hey everyone has freedom of choice.

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

#78

Post by ksec »

swiley wrote: post #12
pentae wrote: post #9

I suspect this has something to do with the inferior intel modem that was used during the Qualcomm debacle. One of the main advantages of the next iPhone will be returning to a Qualcomm modem that isn't rubbish.

While I’m not a fan of what apple did it’s a bit disturbing that there’s literally just one company making cellular modems for US devices and that this company is really very hostile to users and device manufacturers.

They made the best modem for a price where many cant refuse. Or you could choose other modem from Mediatek, while it is stable enough, they often come very late in the cycle.

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

#79

Post by derefr »

landont wrote: 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…

If you've ever been in an area where your phone is just barely connected to a tower, and is struggling to keep a connection (and has no better tower to switch to), you'll notice your phone will get quite hot—hotter than it would normally let itself get before thermal-throttling. (Because it's not the CPU getting that hot; it's the antenna+baseband.)

Often, this heat will be localized to where the antenna is located—I've noticed that my iPhone 8 will sometimes feel burning hot along its right edge, for example, and no amount of closing applications or disabling radios will cool it down. The only thing for it, usually, is to turn it off entirely, such that the baseband stops receiving power. (For some reason, upon turning it back on, it doesn't heat back up, even if I haven't moved—perhaps because the baseband's criteria for connecting to towers is stricter than its criteria for staying connected to towers.)

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

#80

Post by deftnerd »

swiley wrote: post #7
jolmg wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This an advertisement for their RF phone cases This is on ieee.org. The article mentioned this[1] other test by the Chicago Tribune. This isn't purely an advertisement though it serves that purpose a bit. It's disputed because they only tested 2 iPhones. > There are reasons to take the results with a grain of salt, however. McCaughey clarified that Penumbra supplied RF Exposure Labs with one iPhone 7 and one iPhone…

A lot of these smartphones go through imperical tests in an anechoic chamber managed by a third party lab to see if they’re bellow the allowed levels in each band. That sounds hackish but (IMO) isn’t the end of the world. What weirds me out is that they’ll send them to these third party labs and repeatedly test some small number (possibly one) of devices until it’s right up against what’s allowed. That feels less tha…

The "conspiracy" portion of my brain makes me wonder if it's possible that Apple phones have lower power levels if the location services determines that the phone is in a location with a known anechoic chamber. There can't be that many of them.

Such behavior has already been shown by automobile manufacturers during the "diesel-gate" incidents.

Post reply on HN