|
Cell Phones And
Cancer. Should You be Concered? Part 3
Lifebluetube Headset
Cell Phone Radiation Protection
Mobile Phone Radiation Protection
Trifield Electromagnetic Field
The idea should be to make the SAR rating easy to find for
any cell phone before the purchase is made. Indeed, the FCC
has a database, but finding your way to it from the FCC's
home page, or even it's SAR page (which leads you to another
page called the FCC ID search page) is not the most
intuitive experience, nor does its name – the Equipment
Authorization System — make you feel as though you've found
what you're looking for.
Marry walked me through the process and then said I had to
enter the device's FCC Grantee and Product code into the
search page. These codes, according to the FCC's SAR page,
are "usually shown somewhere on the case of the phone or
device. In many cases, you will have to remove the battery
pack to find the number." Of course, as I'm being walked
through this process, I'm thinking that to find the SAR
rating this way implies that you already have the phone,
which defeats the purpose of using the database to help with
a purchasing decision.
To make matters worse, searching the database on the
Firefly's FCC ID of R7C-F100 turned up nothing. Searching on
the Applicant Name of "Firefly" did however turn up two
entries for Firefly Mobile (both with the R7C-F100 FCC ID)
which, when you click on the "Detail" link, leads you to an
index of reports, one of which is the "SAR Test Report", a
PDF that simply wouldn't open for me on the first few tries
(eventually, I got it). As far as I'm concerned the system
is both philosophically (to the extent that it's supposed to
serve the citizens of the U.S.) and physically broken. Like
I said, write your congressman.
Provided you can get to the Firefly reports, you will find
the .945 head test rating for the Firefly Spark phone. To be
fair, since I asked Lai what he does, I also asked Marry.
Marry said "I have a daughter who is 9 and one who is 12 and
they both user Firefly phones and I feel more comfortable
with their safety now than before they had those phones."
Marry was referring to the fact that, simply by having
phones in their possession, his daughters were safer. Of
course, they'd even be more safe if the phone supported E911
GPS. (The documentation makes no mention of this. But
wouldn't you want that for your kids?) Marry went onto say
that his personal phone is a Nokia 3595, which according to
CNET's SAR lookup page (far easier, but less complete than
the FCC's database), has a SAR rating of 1.08.
So, what's the next phone that I'm putting to my head? As it
turns out, I'm looking to use a PocketPC-based phone to do
some podcast testing and the one I've been spying also has
the lowest SAR rating of all the phones in CNET's database:
The AudioVox PPC6601 with a SAR rating of .12. If you
believe Marry, that means the radio is turned down, which in
turn means it will be difficult to complete calls. We'll
see.
Norfolk, Virginia, USA
Dominica, Roseau,
South Perth, Victoria,
Grenada, Saint George's
Niger, Niamey,
Switzerland, Bern,
Hervey Bay, Queensland,
Nicaragua, Managua,
Mozambique, Maputo,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sarajevo
http://www.emfnews.org/store |
