Much ado about very Little (Telecom Industry hype about SAR Info)
18 July 2000
---------- Original message ----------
Subject: Much ado about very little (Telecom industry hype about SAR info)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 07:34:20 -0500
From: Roy Beavers
Organization: EMF-L Bulletin Board
I know that many readers are encouraged by yesterday's announcement by the cell phone industry that henceforth they would be publishing their SAR numbers "with" their cell phones -- the implied meaning: that the information would be there (in hand, on the box, KNOWN to the buyer) at the time of purchase by the public....
Well ... look again!! What they are REALLY proposing is something a whole lot different......!!!
I have forwarded below the Associated Press account of what they propose to do..... I believe it is more accurate than the initial reports that were put out by other news agencies -- agencies that could have some reason to "go along with" the industry's misleading "P.R." version.....
To highlight what I mean, I have inserted some commentary into the text below, identified thus: [ ]....
Please read all the way....... I sign-off below.......
06:59 PM ET 07/17/00
Cell Phone Radiation To Be Revealed
By BRUCE MEYERSON
AP Business Writer
NEW YORK (AP) _ Mobile phone makers will be required to disclose information on the radiation levels produced by their handsets under a new policy adopted by the wireless industry's most influential trade group. The new guidelines will be imposed in August for all new handset models submitted for product certification by the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, the Washington-based organization confirmed Monday. Cell phones will start being packaged with the new information in three to six months, CTIA said.
[......Note that older models of cell phones are not included in the new policy..... guru......]
The new policy comes amid growing doubts over the long-presumed safety of holding a wireless phone against the head for prolonged periods of time. British researchers caused a stir in May with a report saying there's no evidence cell phone radiation is dangerous, but that future research may show otherwise.
"There has been increasing interest in this, and this is our way of responding, but we were also looking for an opportunity to make this information more understandable for consumers," said Jo-Anne Basile, a CTIA official.
As yet, there's been no medical evidence suggesting that radiation from mobile phones might cause cancer or other health problems. But at the same time, there's no definitive proof that cell phone radiation is harmless.
[........Well ... the first sentence in the above statement, of course, continues the myth that was started by the the U.K. IEGMP (Sir William Stewart's group) Report......... In fact, there is an abundance of evidence "suggesting that radiation from mobile phones might cause cancer or other health problems." Guru has provided commentary and evidence to that effect in previous messages...... Also, the website is full of it......
The world may yet have to pay a terrible price for those (Repacholi inspired??) words in the IEGMP Report!! .... guru....]
The radiation reading, known as the "specific absorption rate" or SAR, is a measure of the amount of radiation absorbed by the body while using a mobile phone.
Every phone maker needs to report that figure to the Federal Communications Commission when applying for product approval. The FCC began making those readings available in late 1998, but the information wasn't easy to find and it was not until last month that the agency began making them more widely available on its Web site.
While the actual SAR measurement won't be printed on the box of new cell phones, there will be information showing how to access that information from the FCC, said Basile. [.......!!!!!!!!!.......guru......]
[.........Above, you see the bitter truth about the extent of this "P.R." hype by the industry...... They don't intend to make the info visible at the time of sale at all!!!!! Did you (as I did) get the opposite impression from the first news reports.....??
In fact, what the industry describes above ... is nothing new.....!!!! That info has been available, all along, to buyers who were sufficiently informed to ask (few are!!)...... This whole episode is just another industry/government charade to make the public think that there has "been a change of heart." NOT SO......!! It is just more of the same old "Let's screw the dumb public"...... They don't know what is gong on anyway........ guru.......]
Last month, the Food and Drug Administration announced that it would collaborate with the CTIA on new scientific studies in a bid to settle the uncertainty.
[.........May God save us ... from that collaboration.....!!!.... guru......]
Experts say it's particularly hard to predict the long-term impact of a product that's just two decades old, especially since most of the 95 million Americans who now have cell phones began using them in the past five years.
"No one really knows how big the risk is from cell phones. It is very early in the research, but for those who are concerned, you now have a way to measure the relative safety of phones," said Louis Slesin, the editor of Microwave News, a newsletter on health risks from the various types of radiation that people are exposed to daily.
Most phone makers are expected to comply with the new CTIA policy, which calls for the written materials enclosed with every new handset to include the official radiation reading.
[..........The written materials!!! Be sure you take a magnifying glass with you at the time of purchase..... guru......]
The new CTIA guidelines will also require the boxes for new mobile phones to show that the product has met the safety guidelines for radiation emissions set by the Federal Communications Commission.
[..........Thanks for absolutely nothing ... on that one.......!! As most readers of EMF-L are aware, the FCC Guidelines have absolutely nothing to do with the currently "suspect" non-ionizing radiation effects......!!!!!.... guru....]
Basile stressed that "the variations in SARs should not be seen as differences in the safety of different phones.
"What we want to provide for the consumer is the message that these phones meet a rigorous federal standard with a built-in safety margin and any variations below that standard are not significant."
[........Basile has a job to do........ Sell the "party line"........ "rigorous federal standards" B.S.!!!!..... guru......]
..............Does everybody now "have the message" as to what this latest industry/government hype is all about??
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.
People are more important than profits!!
Back to Top