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

131–140 of 171 posts

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

#131

Post by bgeeek »

im3w1l wrote: post #106
deftnerd wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 p…

Old LEDs are fine in both bright and dark environments, too-bright LEDs are a recent (5y? 10y?) thing. I wonder if LCD could be even nicer... I don't think I've ever seen single-pixel LCD status indicator.

Any kind of light in my bedroom is deeply annoying to me when trying to sleep. And I have the same problem with sound too. Any kind of high pitch, etc, from a plug, light, etc, really does cause problems with my sleep.

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

#132

Post by zaptidizap »

meekstro wrote: post #71
meekstro wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 in…

Mercury in dental work works too!

Its not even funny how ignorant people are but let me rub it in: that one doesnt want to know there are biological effects has no more than placebo level effect. It is still an effect tho.

The "I'm not aware of any such research" should rule out any conclusion. Unawareness is only evidence of it self.

Personally im more worried about having my attentionspan cut into small chunks by endless notifications and having my sleep interupted.

I actually own the fancy rf measurment toys. Odly the most comfortable spot to sleep in the house also has the lowest measurments. Its sohh anecdotal, i know, i know..

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

#134

Post by zaptidizap »

lima wrote: post #101
avian wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you can debate how much imported (or for that matter, domestically produced) stuff is actually tested, but the fact remains that existing laws and regulations do cover this, even if enforcement is maybe lacking.

I'm an ham radio operator, and shortwave spectrum pollution is sadly a big problem despite very strict regulations. The unfortunate reality is that the market is flooded with noisy devices, often cheaply produces overseas, that vastly exceed legal limits (chargers and other rectifiers, plasma televisions, powerline adapters, and much more). Enforcement is difficult due to how widespread these devices are. In many pla…

I think police cars should measure it.

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

#135

Post by sjwright »

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…

> Leave your phone in a metal, security cubby and your battery will die quickly

Which is the best selfish reason to remember to switch on flight mode on an aeroplane. (Also when you’re trekking in areas where you know cell coverage is nonexistent.)

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

#136

Post by nomel »

willis936 wrote: post #124
rini17 wrote: post #118

To everyone who keeps repeating "it's non-ionizing radiation, so any other effect than thermal is impossible": 1. saying something is impossible is not a scientific statement 2. RF is capable of specifically affecting enzyme reactions, random example: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2014/nr/c4nr0...

This ignores the primary issue of needing empirical evidence before claiming discovery. If non-ionizing radiation of a certain level is hazardous then it is provable. Affecting enzyme reactions is an observed effect, but what is the health risk?

"What is the health risk?" is something that modern medicine can rarely tell us and has almost always been somewhere between lacking to absolutely wrong. Both are related to the inability to do long term studies, beyond the ones that me and you are currently part of.

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

#137

Post by notjtrig »

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.

When I was mining bitcoin I discovered graphics cards under load mess with my sleep, I would wake up feeling like I was very sick if I slept in the same room as a rig.

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

#138

Post by jcims »

cududa wrote: post #120
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…

Oh bull. There is no way to prove RF modifies microtubules.

https://youtu.be/voVa7Pj2xUg

There’s definitely an effect. It’s in clinical trials right now.

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

#139

Post by stordoff »

JshWright wrote: post #128
meekstro wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are uncomfortable that some phenomena particularly biological don't fit in a scientific experiment neatly and are more comfortable labelling 3% of the population hypochondriacs to alleviate your own anxiety. What I've stated is that I experienced increased fatigue from exposure to ER while I was seriously ill and had elevated serum ferritin. Each ferritin molecule has 4500 iron atoms and serrin ferritin i…

Are you unfamiliar with how powerful the placebo effect is? Totally meaningless "treatments" can have real biological impacts, simply because the person receiving them believes it will. If you truly cared about this topic, I assume you would want to know if the effect is real, or just your mind playing a trick on you.

> simply because the person receiving them believes it will

Perhaps somewhat bizarrely, maybe even if they know it's only placebo:

> In these four studies patients were randomised to receive open label placebo (pills described as "inert placebos containing no medication") plus usual treatment or usual treatment[...]

> The consistency and magnitude of symptomatic relief across these studies—performed in hospitals on two continents—suggest that open label placebo may have a real therapeutic benefit.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6889847/

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

#140

Post by oliv__ »

testvox wrote: post #10
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…

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.

Just as a counterpoint to what everyone seems to be saying here: there most definitely is science that points towards RF fields having negative health effects for humans, and it is plentiful.

The fact that no-one talks about any of this just goes to show the extent of the lobbying done by the telecom industry.

https://www.emfdata.org/en

Post reply on HN