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 at www.ewg.org.
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.
(Source: USA Today)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
5 Responses
The EWG is NOT a “government watchdog group” – rather it is a left wing advocacy organization – which doesn’t mean they are wrong, but you have to rememer that they have an political agenda which many of us do not share.
I believe you can find reliable independent data in the NIH and FCC websites.
If cell phones were dangerous, we would be able to observe a massive world wide epidemic. In recent years we’ve observed various epidemics (AIDS, Swine flu, etc.), but not attributable to cell phones.
#1,
Its just the opposite. Government entities like the FCC have a history of being inefficient and side with whoever is most politically advantageous at the time. It is not in the economy’s or the politicians interest to side against the major telephone companies of the world with all the hundreds of billions of dollars at stake. To think otherwise is purely naive.
Cancer is a lot different than AIDS, Swine flu, etc. in that the very nature of cancer is that it takes years and years (sometimes) to grow and take hold before it is even noticeable.
To read this article and take the recommendations seriously is delusional. Cell phones emit radiation and cause cancer after time. Especially in children who have different levels of hormones going on and different levels of physical tolerances for abnormalities. To say that I’ll take the phone with a lower lever of radiation as opposed to a higher level is insane. Who says the “lower level” ones are at all safe??? Would a healthy person take a “low” level of chemotherapy if it allowed him to enjoy electronic gadgets also?
What we do to our own body’s as adults is up to us no matter how stupid. What we allow our children access to is wrong because they are trusting us to look out for their safety.
is it dangerous at all if a cellphone is in your pocket?
Akuperma (# 1) The Environmental Working Group is a left wing organization? Health conscious zealots, maybe . . . but left? – Everything that is not thumbtacked to the right wall is now deemed left, correct?
Too many people here are not well enough read to be able to distinguish between and among Socialists, Marxists, Anarchists, Social Democrats, Progressives, New Deal Liberals or Environmentalists, to name just a few – you really have no clue what these very different ideologies stand – to you folk they’re all just “LEFT” – and whatever they are – you just know they’re bad – This is so tiring.
#1, akuperma: I have to agree with #1 that there is nothing ‘leftist’ here. Apparently just the word “environment” leads people to think they’re ‘left’ (and even if so, then what? anything wrong with that?).
And as for your question as to why there is no epidemic: cancer may take years to develop.
Can you tell me about the influence of cell phones after 20 or 30 years? After 40 years? In a group that is sufficiently large to be scientifically significant?
As it says, there has already been (at least) one study that concluded that after 10 years, there is an increased risk. Who knows what will be a few years after that? Perhaps 90% of the population will have a brain tumor then and it will be as common as the flu. CH”V, H”Y, I should add.