Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Communications

FCC Revisiting Mobile Device Radiation Standards 80

Posted by Soulskill
from the enjoy-that-can-of-worms dept.
MojoKid writes "Did you know that the FCC hasn't updated its guidelines regarding maximum radiation levels in mobile devices since 1996? FCC chairman Julius Genachowski is apparently aware of this, because he's looking to launch a formal inquiry into the matter. In a statement that was recently circulated, the FCC isn't exactly concerned that current standards are too lax, but it makes sense to periodically review standards for an industry that changes and evolves so rapidly and dramatically. There has been much debate in recent years about the potential danger of radiation from cell phones, and although there has been some study on the subject, there is not yet a general consensus on whether there is a real danger from mobile device radiation, and if there is, what the acceptable levels might be."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FCC Revisiting Mobile Device Radiation Standards

Comments Filter:
  • Uh... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CajunArson (465943) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:45PM (#40339161) Journal

    1. I'm assuming there hasn't been too much radical human evolution since 1996.
    2. Considering that modern devices likely emit lower levels of radiation simply to save battery life compared to the bricks of '96, I doubt that you are getting cooked by your iPhone in any worse way than by your grandpa's Startac.

  • by Hatta (162192) on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:48PM (#40339197) Journal

    Ionizing or non-ionizing?

    If ionizing, why are cell phones emitting ionizing radiation at all?

    If non-ionizing, it's completely harmless. No sane person worrys about non-ionizing radiation.

  • Finally (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jrmcferren (935335) <robbie...mcferren@@@gmail...com> on Friday June 15, 2012 @04:49PM (#40339207) Journal

    Hopefully they will get rid of these BULLSHIT regulations. Handheld two way radios can put out up to SEVEN yes SEVEN watts and the FCC doesn't have any problems with those. I don't need a seven watt transmitter, but damnit allow them use use efficient antennas in cell phones. If a cop can use a five watt transmitter, why can't everybody else?

  • by cpu6502 (1960974) on Friday June 15, 2012 @05:00PM (#40339331)

    >>>Non-ionizing radiation refers to any type of electromagnetic radiation that does not carry enough energy per quantum to remove an electron from an atom or molecule. - wikipedia.

    Okay.
    That still doesn't mean they are safe. Who knows how the EM waves might disrupt internal cellular processes, like the duplication of DNA during cellular cloning. It is when that process goes wrong that cancer happens.

  • by tomhuxley (951364) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:33PM (#40341113)

    And the moon has massive effects on the tides, yet somehow seems to avoid getting blamed for causing cancer. Likewise, music makes your ear drums vibrate, yet where is the commission looking into rock 'n' roll 'n' cancer?

    The reason it would be "retarded" to think those cause cancer is because there is no mechanism by which they could cause cancer. Likewise, there is no mechanism by which non-ionizing radiation can cause cancer. It is orders of magnitude to weak to have any effect.

    It's not a blanket statement, it is a reasonable position to hold in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.

Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten

Working...