Phonegate: radiation exceeding regulatory limits
French Government data indicates cell phones expose consumers to radiation levels higher than manufacturers claim
Cell Phone Radiation Scandal: More Exposure Than Manufacturers Claim
“PhoneGate” In France, government data release reveals 9 out of 10 phones tested exceed regulatory limits
(Washington, DC) Under court order, the National Frequency Agency (ANFR) of France has just disclosed that most cell phones exceed government radiation limits when tested the way they are used, next to the body. Manufacturers are not required to test phones in shirt or pants pockets. French government tests on hundreds of cell phones reveal that in 2015, 9 out of 10 phones exceed the manufacturer’s reported radiation test levels when re-tested in positions where the phone is in contact with the body. The government had refused to disclose these test results until the court order.
Children handed cell phones as toys.
On June 1, 2017, ANFR posted the details of the make, model and test results for each phone that was tested, after months of legal action by French physician Dr. Marc Arazi. Arazi’s request for the information was initially denied. Popular brands such as Apple, Motorola, Samsung and Nokia were among the cell phone models tested. When tested in contact with the body, some phones have test results as high as triple the manufacturer’s previously reported radiation levels.
“As a physician, I am deeply concerned about what this means for our health and especially the health of our children. People have a right to know that when cell phones are tested in ways people commonly use phones – such as in direct contact with their body – the values exceed current regulatory limits. This is a first victory for transparency in this industry scandal,” commented Arazi.
Ricocheting in headlines throughout France, Arazi and his colleagues have coined the situation as “PhoneGate” because of the parallels to “Diesel Gate” – the Volkswagen emissions saga. Devra Davis, PhD, President of Environmental Health Trust explained, “Volkswagen cars passed diesel emission tests when tested in laboratory conditions, but when the cars were driven on real roads, they emitted far more fumes. In the same way, every one of these cell phones ‘passed’ laboratory radiation SAR tests. These phones are legally considered compliant. However, when these phones are tested in the ways that people actually use them in real life, such as in your jeans pocket or bra, the amount of absorbed radiation emissions in our bodies violates the regulatory limits.”
“This is an enormous international scandal. This is not only about France and Europe, as this applies to all persons who use cell phones in every country. If phones were tested in the ways we use them, they would be illegal,” stated Dr. Davis, pointing out that these findings were replicated earlier by a US FCC certified laboratory as part of an investigation by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Findings of higher radiation levels than expected (and even higher after phones are fixed) were also documented by the Holon Institute of Technology in Israel and featured on Israeli news.
“Far more concerning is that the regulatory limits do not protect the public from adverse health effects related to long-term exposures,“ Davis commented, pointing to recently published research. A study in the American Journal of Epidemiology found cell phones associated with a doubled risk of glioma, a type of brain cancer. Studies performed by the US National Toxicology Program found glioma and DNA damage increased in rats exposed to long-term cell phone radiation.
“I see children cradling cell phones in their laps as their mothers do grocery shopping. Teenagers are sleeping with cell phones placed on their chest or directly beside their heads all night long. Pregnant women put cell phones and wireless devices on their abdomen. Parents have a right to know that when children use cell phones in these ways, their bodies are absorbing wireless radiation at levels that exceed limits set for adults 20 years ago,” stated Theodora Scarato, Program Director at Environmental Health Trust, referring to how the American Academy of Pediatrics has repeatedly called on the US Government to update cell phone testing to reflect current use patterns. The American Academy of Pediatrics has issued clear recommendations to reduce cell phone radiation exposures to children.
The Public is Unaware
France’s National Agency of Health Security of Food, Environment and Labour (ANSES) July 2016 report “Radiofrequency Exposure and the Health of Children” conceded that the public is largely unaware of instructions to keep a distance between cell phones and anyone’s head and body. ANSES stated that it was “unlikely that people, especially children, are aware of the conditions of use close to the body, as defined by manufacturers.”
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) independent survey of more than 11,000 Canadians found that more than 80 percent were unaware of manufacturers’ recommended separation distance and 67 percent admitted they carry their phones against their bodies.
The newly released French data is also corroborated by the 2017 independently commissioned investigation by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that tested popular cell phones in a US government certified testing laboratory and found SAR values surpassed the US and Canadian allowable SAR values when the phones were tested in body contact positions. In response to the CBC report, manufacturers stated they were fully compliant.
The Wireless Industry Argues “No Evidence” To Update Testing Protocols
Read what Apple states here -and you can see in example of how the SAR looks different depending on the tissue averaging at this link.
The CTIA, the wireless industry lobby group is opposed to mandatory disclosures about the manufacturer’s instructions and also is opposed to updating cell phone radiation testing methods to include body contact positions such as were performed by the French government. The CTIA argued that “there is no reliable evidence proving that current testing protocols fail to ensure compliance with RF standards, “ in their submission to the US Federal Communications Commission concerning the FCC Docket on Human Exposures to Radiofrequency Radiation. The CTIA stated that “a zero-measuring requirement would not accurately mimic real usage or increase safety.”
In California, the City of Berkeley was sued by the CTIA, a wireless industry lobby group, when the City passed an ordinance mandating consumers are informed of these manufacturers’ instructions by retail stores. The CTIA argued that the “Right To Know Ordinance” violated free speech rights and recently lost their case in court when the judges ruled that the Ordinance was “in the public interest”.
After litigation by UC Berkeley public health professor Dr. Joel Moskowitz, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) released cell phone guidance that the Department scientists had drafted, but withheld from publicly posting for seven years. The guidelines aimed inform the public from possible health impacts from cell phone radiation.
Litigation is moving forward involving more than a dozen people in the U.S. who claim their brain cancer is related to their cell phone use. In Italy, a recent court ruling recognized a link between cellphone use and brain tumors and granted lifetime compensation to a man who developed a brain tumor after 15 years of work related cell phone use.
“Why does the public have to sue to get this information?” Scarato asked. “And what about children in schools? The Maryland State Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council has recommended that schools reduce radiofrequency radiation exposures to children by installing wired networks rather than Wi-Fi, same as in Cyprus, France and Israel. Yet at the same time, schools are now allowing or even insisting children bring cell phones into classrooms. I am sure most of those children are carrying these phones from class to class in their pockets close to their body. They are not aware of the radiation exposures.”
For the rest of this article please go to source link below.
For full references please use source link below.