TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: 2.4Ghz vs. 5.8Ghz Cordless Phones and Health

Re: 2.4Ghz vs. 5.8Ghz Cordless Phones and Health

Robert Weller (rweller@h-e.com)
Sun, 30 Jul 2006 19:16:47 -0700

The 2.4 GHz frequency has greater penetration into tissue, but both
types of phones are Non-licensed devices, meaning that the power
density impinging on your person is extremely low. The exposure from
your WiFi card or garage door opener is probably comparable to that
from a cordless phone.

Bob Weller
Member, SC-4, ICES
(International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety)

> From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
> Subject: Re: 2.4Ghz vs. 5.8Ghz Cordless Phones and
> Health Concerns
> Date: 30 Jul 2006 18:00:36 -0400
> Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)

>> Is there any information out there that would indicate which is
>> safer/healthier to use ... a 2.4Ghz or 5.8Ghz cordless phone?

>> I'm not trying to get into a discussion of whether cordless phones
>> actually pose a real health hazard, however, I would like to know
>> which of the two is considered less harmful ... 2.4Ghz or 5.8Ghz
>> radio waves.

> If gophers could read, what books would they choose? Well, the
> truth is that gophers can't read, so that question can't be
> answered.

> As far as RF exposure is concerned, nobody has provided any real
> evidence for harm, so it's hard to say which is less harmful when
> there isn't any evidence of harm.

> If you're worried, use a beltpack unit and hold it away from your
> body. Or just use a wired phone.

> --scott

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: DLR: "Re: NYC Broadband"
Go to Previous message: DLR: "Re: Cingular Analog/TDMA Surcharge"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page