• That up to 60% of the radiation emitted by a typical cell phone, (enough to cause heating), will be absorbed by the user’s head?

• That multiple independent tests have measured up to four times the radiation coming out of the earpiece of a cellular phone, than out of the antenna?

• That a similar amount of radiation comes out from the keypad and the mouthpiece as well?

• That recent studies are showing serious bioeffects at exposures far below the current exposure standard?

• That many phones cannot even meet these arguably inadequate standards?

• That manufacturers could make the phones so less radiation would escape into the user’s head, but most are unwilling to do so, apparently because to do so would decrease their profit, and acknowledge the potential risk?

• That different brands and models of phones have widely different levels of emissions?

• That Lloyd’s of London recently refused to underwrite cellular manufacturers against possible future claims of microwave health damage?

Leakage, Standards, and Excessive Exposure

In another test, three times that much was measured, and the data for the following graph was collected:

Unshielded maximum radiation level at the given lattitude (in mW/cm²) vs. distance along the vertical axis of the phone (cm) [NOTE: the emissions from the body of the phone were highest near the midline, and in the antenna region they were highest, of course, over the antenna]:

Graph provided courtesy of Emil DeToffol

Why all the leakage? It has been postulated that fundamentally, this is about keeping production costs low, that the source of the leakage is poorly matched transmitters, feeds and antennas. It is also related to the techniques used to measure the fields, and the protocols involved. Secondarily, it is about lack of shielding in the phone case.

Because the FCC is primarily concerned with making sure Cellular Phones do not interfere with other devices, they are willing to ignore what is happening in the immediate vicinity of the phone, the so-called near-field, where your head is. In a letter to FCC Chairman, Mr. William E. Kennard, Dr. David Nghiem, Ph.D, and CEO of USA Wireless, describes how none of the phones they tested met the Emissions Mask Requirements of the FCC specification.

Your Cellphone is licensed to operate at a certain frequency; however it also emits radiation at other frequencies as well. The FCC probably due mostly to it's focus on interference, sets a gain measured in decibels, for the harmonics. The third harmonic is supposed to be 1/10,000 of the fundamental frequency, but in testing, USA Wireless discovered none of the phones they tested met this Emissions Mask Requirement.

Because of all this leakage, and the proximity of the antenna, a disproportionate amount of radiation is absorbed directly into the user’s head.

In a test performed for the October 20, 1999 ABC News 20/20 segment on Cellphone Safety by IMST in Germany, they found that four out of five of the phones they tested exceeded the standard in at least one testing position. They determined that a phone would pass or fail the safety standard based upon what angle the phone was held at during the test. The standard was reportedly entirely ambiguous in this respect, allowing phone manufacurers to simply re-orient their phone until it passes the test. One popular model exceeded the standard in both positions tested, and would only pass when a remote earpice was used.

In the ABC test, all phones were tested in Analog mode. They report testing in two positions; one, referred to as the "touch position" yielded lower SARs.

In a follow-up, ABC News says the FCC thinks the ABC test results "warrant closer scrutiny", and the FDA says the industry should design phones to minimize the radiation exposure to users.

continued next column -

Manuf.	Model	Output	Source
Motorola	StarTac	0.43 max	ABC
Motorola	MicroTac Lite XL	1.52-3.15	ABC
Nokia	6160	1.84-2.16	ABC
Nokia	6160 w/ earpiece	0.0281	ABC
Nokia	636	1.54-2.12	ABC
Ericsson	AH618	1.34-1.65	ABC
Output is expressed in Watts per Kilogram Current UK Standard = 1.0W/Kg Current US Standard = 1.6W/Kg

Manuf.	Model	Output	Source
Motorola	V3688	0.02	BBC
Motorola	StarTac 70	0.02	BBC
Hagenuk	Global Handy	0.03	BBC
Ericsson	GA628	0.26	BBC
Bosch	World 718	0.28	BBC
Nokia	6110	0.29	BBC
Nokia	5110	0.37	BBC
Nokia	2110	0.44	BBC
Output is expressed in Watts per Kilogram Current UK Standard = 1.0W/Kg Current US Standard = 1.6W/Kg

Manuf.	Model	Output	Source
Hagenuk	Global	0.28	Kuster
Motorola	StarTac	0.33	Kuster
Sony	CM-DX 1000	0.41	Kuster
Nokia	8110i	0.73	Kuster
Motorola	d160	0.81	Kuster
Sony	CMD-Z1	0.88	Kuster
Ericsson	GF788	0.91	Kuster
Ericsson	GH688	0.95	Kuster
Panasonic	EB G500	0.98	Kuster
Sharp	TQ G700	1.01	Kuster
Philips	Genie	1.05	Kuster
Nokia	1611	1.06	Kuster
Philips	Diga	1.06	Kuster
Ascom	Axento	1.25	Kuster
Bosch	M-Com 906	1.32	Kuster
Ascom	Elisto	1.33	Kuster
Output is expressed in Watts per Kilogram Current UK Standard = 1.0W/Kg Current US Standard = 1.6W/Kg

Note: Different methodologies were used to arrive at the figures in the three tables above, that accounts for the widely different figures. The important thing to note is that within each test, the models were tested in the same way, and the relative output still differs over a very wide range.

Recent studies are showing more significant bio-effects at lower and lower power densities. Dr. Henry Lai has reportedly seen DNA single and double strand breaks at levels below the current FCC exposure standard. Magras & Xenos have reported irreversible sterility in mice after 5 generations of exposure to 0.168 to 1.053 microwatts per square centimeter in an "antenna park." Note that the current, applicable US exposure standard would be 579 microwatts per square centimeter, -- 500 times higher! -- and that this very low exposure level would relate more to a person living near a Cellular Tower, than a phone user.

An underwriter for Lloyd’s of London recently made international news when he refused to underwrite cellular manufacturers against future claims due to cellular health effects. Lloyd’s took a beating on asbestos, and it looks like they are going to play it safe on this one. Lloyd’s stays in business by playing the odds, and by doing it well. That they are taking this seriously, is an indicator that we should be taking it seriously as well.

• BBC News - Mobile phone cancer study "flawed."

• Kuster - Prof. Kuster, project overview.

• Studies - Recent compilation of studies showing potentially serious bioeffects.

• Personal communications with Roy Beavers, Bill P. Curry, Emil DeToffol, Libby Kelly, Chris Reuss, et. al.

• University of Victoria Applied Electromagnetics Group - Source of the cellphone and head image above.

• USA Wireless - Can the Industry provide much safer cellphones?