TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers

Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers

Tim Keating (NotForJunkEmail@directinternet11.com1)
Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:27:01 -0500

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:11:58 -0800, Joseph <>

> On 9 Mar 2005 08:56:41 -0800, Dean <>
> wrote:

>> A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
>> phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
>> interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.

> They've brought out this pony for a couple decades now and haven't
> found anything. Why should we believe this latest scare?

Because the technology has change dramatically over time.

A couple of decades ago:

A. Cell phones were fairly rare and air time was expensive.
(short and infrequent calls).
B. Used benign handsets.
Most where trunk or bag units with antenna mounted on the
exterior of motor vehicles. (Increased Distance from RF radiator).
C. Operated in or around the 900 Mhz band..
The human body is more transparent to lower frequency RF energy.
D. Volume of tissue which absorbed RF energy was much greater, thus
overall exposer per in^3 was way lower.

The danger has increased because:

a. Self contained hand unit proximity to users head.
(Inverse square law.. increases exposer dramatically.)
b. Higher operating frequencies. (1.8 to 2.0 Ghz).
(Overall RF absorption gets concentrated into a relatively
small volume centered above the users ear.).
c. People are using them wit greater frequency and talking for
long periods.

Care to roll the dice again??

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: "Re: Wiring Two Lines on One Jack"
Go to Previous message: Tony P.: "Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers"
May be in reply to: Dean: "Cell Phone Radiation Dangers"
Next in thread: Steve Sobol: "Re: Cell Phone Radiation Dangers"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page