|
 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
By Leslie
Cauley, USA TODAY
Some cellphones emit several times more radiation
than others, the Environmental Working Group found in one of the most
exhaustive studies of its kind.
The government watchdog group on Wednesday releases a list ranking cellphones in terms of radiation. The free listing of more than 1,000 devices can be viewed here.
Concerns about radiation and cellphones have swirled for years. Scientific evidence to date has not been able to make a hard link between cancer and cellphones. But recent studies "are showing increased risk for brain and mouth tumors for people who have used cellphones for at least 10 years," says Jane Houlihan, senior vice president of research at the Washington-based group. CTIA, the wireless industry lobbying association, disagrees. In a statement it noted that "scientific evidence has overwhelmingly indicated that wireless devices do not pose" a health hazard. That's why the American Cancer Society, World Health Organization and Food and Drug Administration, among others, "all have concurred that wireless devices are not a public health risk," the CTIA statement says. Houlihan acknowledges that "the verdict is still out" on whether cellphones can be linked directly to cancer. "But there's enough concern that the governments of six countries" — including France, Germany and Israel — "have issued limits of usage of cellphones, particularly for children." Houlihan says her group is "advising people to choose a phone that falls on the lower end of the (radiation) spectrum" to minimize potential health problems. The Samsung Impression has the lowest: 0.35 watts per kilogram, a measure of how much radiation is absorbed into the brain when the phone is held to the ear. The highest: T-Mobile's MyTouch 3G, Motorola Moto VU204 and Kyocera Jax S1300, all at 1.55 W/kg. The Apple iPhone, sold exclusively by AT&T in the USA, is in the middle of the pack at 1.19 W/kg. The Federal Communications Commission, which sets standards for cellphone radiation, requires that all devices be rated at 1.6 W/kg or lower. The Environmental Working Group says the FCC's standard is outmoded, noting that it was established 17 years ago, when cellphones and wireless usage patterns were much different. The group wants the government to take a "fresh look" at radiation standards. The FCC currently doesn't require handset makers to divulge radiation levels. As a result, radiation rankings for dozens of devices, including the BlackBerry Pearl Flip 8230 and Motorola KRZR, aren't on the group's list.
Guidelines: You share in
the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil.
Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use
the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. Read
more.
Comments: (190)
Showing:
New: Most
recommended! 
Obstreperous
(21 friends, send
message) wrote: 29m ago
Most people who talk on their cell all day are
self-important jerks, so maybe it's a good thing they're potentially
dangerous. 
jcstras
(0 friends, send
message) wrote: 1h 1m ago
Now, here is an example of something in the press
that really gets under my skin!! They are talking about cell phone
"RADIATION"... Now, I am an engineering consultant to the nuclear
industry, or I was until I retired. I have over thirty years experience in
the Nuclear Industry. I am an electronics engineer as far as my degree is
concerned, so I know exactly what kind of "radiation" a cell phone emits!
A cell phone emits what is known as "Radio Frequency Emission". or "RF" as
it is known in the industry. It can be harmful if it has enough power
behind it...It is NOT radiation in the sense of Radioactivity... It is NOT
radioactive! SO there is no reason to throw the cellphone away! Just don't
use it as much. Powerful RF emissions Can do harm..but it ISN"T Radiation
in the sense of Radioactivity... 
Red
Dogs (29 friends, send
message) wrote: 1h 8m ago
Haven't the republicans run out of things to worry about yet? 
DarkNemesis
(19 friends, send
message) wrote: 1h 55m ago
One thing is for sure, cell phone usages has
exploded in the last 5 years. Another 5 years will definitely know if it
causes cancer. We can be in for an epedimic of brain cancer! Be
Warned! 
The
Phantom (35 friends, send
message) wrote: 2h 59m ago
"CTIA, the wdejireless industry lobbying
association, disagrees. In a statement it noted that "scientific evidence
has overwhelmingly indicated that wireless devices do not pose" a health
hazard." === Deja vu !! Seems as if I have heard something very similar from tobacco industry lobbyists years ago. 
wrx_girl
(11 friends, send
message) wrote: 3h 21m ago
I'm curious... does using a bluetooth headset in
lieu of holding the phone to your ear cut down on the amount of radiation
you're exposed to? Interesting they didn't cover it in the article and
there's a picture of a dude wearing a bluetooth piece. 
avery_Bing
(0 friends, send
message) wrote: 3h 25m ago
This is a non-story. The radiation from a cell phone
is non-ionizing meaning that the energy of the photons are emitted from
the phone are too low in energy and high in wavelength to interact with
the electron cloud of an atom. The wavelength do interact on a larger
scale which is why antennae can pick them up . The phone battery emits
more absorbable energy in the form of heat than all the radio waves coming
into or out of the phone. bail_out_this must have stong physco somatic
tendencies or is a hypochondriac..... Stories like this just perpetuate irrational fear. The problem with a person having an irrational fear is that no amount of reason, evidence, or logic will change there mind.... 
bail_out_this
(36 friends, send
message) wrote: 4h 46m ago
I don't need a study to tell me cell phones are bad
for me. I've sampled them now and again over the years only to return them
after less than a week due to radiation headaches. i was returning them
before they even had a policy allowing people to do so. My old line used
to be 'as of now I'm the only one who knows about this' .. They always
took it back back then with no penalty... Gee I wonder why.. Now they have
a trial period and I tried one last year and they've not gotten any
better. I'm real sensitive to radiation and the still make me
sick.. I have a free 911 cell phone. I don't need one for anything else anyway.. I'll take some radiation in an emergency..
Roger
L E (0 friends, send
message) wrote: 5h 31m ago
andersdl (0 friends, send message) wrote: 5h 33m ago I know what will help. If anyone is pulled over by the cops for driving while celling, a $1,000 fine and the cop gets to slap you three times. Once for endangering others, once for endangering yourself and once for simply being STUPID. ------------------------------------------- A university (I think Colorado) did a study that recently found texting while driving was 3 to 6 times more dangerous than driving while legally drunk. It's about a $2500 fine out here for drunk driving, jail time plus loosing your license. Perhaps texting while driving should have similar penalties and loss of license. Will not stop everyone but many would rethink their dangerous habit. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yahoo! Buzz Digg Newsvine Reddit FacebookWhat's this?