Skip Navigation
16 comments

  • Cell phones use radiation in the microwave portion of the EM spectrum. Microwave radiation is non-ionizing. The only thing microwave radiation does is heat things, which is what these regulations are meant to protect consumers from in the first place.

    I hate headlines like this because they fuel harmful misinformation. How many people are gonna come away from this headline thinking their phone might give them cancer? How many of those people are going to protest against further development of wireless technology from the misinformed position that non-ionizing EM radiation (such as visible light) can somehow cause cancer?

    • Actually its regulated to protect Radio equipment and guarantee that radio/mobile networks aren't jammed by it, the heating does absolutely nothing and is absolutely harmless to humans.

    • I believe it’s not a matter of is it harmful or not ? Just that there are rules and they’re not Apple’s to change. Until governments and societies decide to change them, they must comply.

    • I really want to see someone fund/perform an experiment, that would hopefully put any doubts to rest. It might take 10-20 years to do but it would be worth it:

      Create 2 completely shielded rooms. In one of the rooms, completely blast the inside of it with 5G, 4G, All the Gs, Wi-Fi, whatever 24/7. Every single kind of EMR that anyone has doubts of. You can even include future spectrum, whatever. Run it at 3x-5x the amplitude of anything anyone could reasonably expect to come across in the world.

      Now, Using only organic and living material (mice, monkeys, plants, single-celled organisms, humans, whatever): confirm which one of them has the EMR turned on. If EMR was dangerous you should obviously see some negative effects. Take as much time as necessary to confirm your findings.

      THEN maybe we can stop all this nonsense and point back to the study. Except I know some people would say "You tested 300 GHz, what about 301.5 GHz!!!! That one is totally dangerous!"

      • It wouldn't work for one simple reason: the people that it would attempt to convince simply wouldn't believe it. I've seen this concept brought up in terms of NASA showing a live stream of Earth to prove it's round to flearthers.

        There is more than enough evidence at this point to say conclusively that non-ionizing radiation cannot cause cancer, and is only harmful to living things because it can heat them. Anyone who believes that there isn't enough evidence at this point simply hasn't read it, and anyone who thinks that the researchers are lying would think the same about this experiment.

      • that can be gamed like most a/b experiments. just keep measuring and adjust your metrics and time window until you get the results you want. doesn't matter if 99% of the time you would have reached the opposite conclusion.

  • This is the best summary I could come up with:

    A regulator in France asked this week that Apple stop selling its iPhone 12 there, after it said tests found that the device emits radiation levels exceeding European restrictions, giving fresh attention to old concerns about health and cellphone usage.

    Apple disputed the findings, saying the device, released in 2020, has been certified by international bodies and complies with regulations, the Associated Press reported.

    The Agence Nationale des Fréquences (ANFR) said in a statement that it expects Apple to “deploy all available means to put an end to the noncompliance” and that failure to act could result in a product recall.

    The move has revived discussions about the potential risks of cellphone radiation, a fraught topic on which decades of scientific research remains inconclusive.

    They also say the way cellphones are used now — often with headsets or for texting or social media — reduces exposure because the phones are held at a distance from the head and body.

    France’s digital minister said the iPhone 12’s radiation levels are still much lower than those that scientific studies say could harm users, and that a software update could solve the compliance issue.

    The original article contains 243 words, the summary contains 191 words. Saved 21%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

16 comments