161–170 of 309 posts
What would Mother Nature think of all this?
Worth noting that this is due to the French regulators applying the same SAR absorption standard as the rest of the EU but at a closer distance. Obviously radiation follows the inverse square law so this means you absorb more radiation in France ;) Even despite this reduced allowable emission the iPhone is barely out of compliance, they will need to reduce power less than 10% or simply get another few millimeters far…
I thought this whole EM radiation fear was bogus. How does it even interact with the body? There are obviously no neutrons flying around..
[1] https://neurosciencenews.com/cellphone-radiation-brain-cance...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe the concern is that non-ionizing radiation can still warm tissues, and depending on the frequency, these can be deeper than what normal sunlight or IR radiation would reach. Whether a few milliwats of that type of warming are actually cause for concern I don't know, but even if it's bogus, that doesn't mean that regulators will not be enforcing legal maximums anyway.
Is a hot shower illegal in France?
Both frequency and amplitude matter; reductive arguments like this will convince neither laypeople nor people with some understanding of physics.
Apple has denied those findings. > Apple said it had provided ANFR with multiple Apple and independent third-party lab results proving its compliance with all applicable SAR regulations and standards in the world. https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-disputes-french-fin...
In each case it was the lab using an incorrect methodology.
I wouldn't be surprised if that's what's happened here. There is a canyon of technical knowhow between RF engineers and testing labs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the link between EM emissions and neutrons?
To my understanding there is no link.
I'm fairly certain that no iPhone model to date emits gamma radiation, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought this whole EM radiation fear was bogus. How does it even interact with the body? There are obviously no neutrons flying around..
I believe the concern is that non-ionizing radiation can still warm tissues, and depending on the frequency, these can be deeper than what normal sunlight or IR radiation would reach. Whether a few milliwats of that type of warming are actually cause for concern I don't know, but even if it's bogus, that doesn't mean that regulators will not be enforcing legal maximums anyway.
Oh right, i did't think about the penetration depth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought this whole EM radiation fear was bogus. How does it even interact with the body? There are obviously no neutrons flying around..
“Cell phone radiation increases the risk for a number of biological and health disorders, including gliomas and acoustic neuroma brain cancer. Researchers discuss how to reduce the risk of cell phone radiation.”[1] [1] https://neurosciencenews.com/cellphone-radiation-brain-cance...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt it works this way. Regulatory bodies check your paperwork. They don't test things themselves.
From the article: > The mobile phones were tested by an accredited laboratory, which allows the ANFR to ensure that the SAR values comply with European regulation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To my understanding there is no link.
Once again, it all depends on the frequency! Gamma radiation is EM radiation and can cause nuclear fission [1], which in turn can release neutron radiation. I'm fairly certain that no iPhone model to date emits gamma radiation, though. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photofission