If it's dangerous to have a cell phone within arms reach because of electromagnetic radiation...

If it wasn’t harmful why would they have legal limits in the first place and why would reducing exposure be desirable enough to have methods outlined in a legal ass covering document? Read between the lines user.

uuuuuhpstate new york

>If it wasn’t harmful why would they have legal limits in the first place
At very high intensities it is harmful. It's harmless anywhere near the power cellphones transmit at.

>why would reducing exposure be desirable enough to have methods outlined in a legal ass covering document
I don't know. Maybe they think it will improve their odds in court.

>Read between the lines user.
The only thing between the lines is "please don't sue us".

>If it wasn't dangerous, why would they have legal limits.

Because nutjobs have lobbyists, just like everybody else. Go look at the occupations of current members of Congress, or parliament, or whatever they have where you live. How any have any background in science? They kow next to nothing about any of this, and are guided by lobbyists -- the wackos have lobbyists, so do the phone companies. The wackos have the ability to say "Vote against our restrictions and we'll shout about how you voted for more cancer." All the other side has is the science, which neither the legislator nor the average voter care much about compared to "CANCER!!!!!!"

I was a very low level staffer in a US Senator's office for 5 years, so have some experience with this.

>why would reducing exposure be desirable

Because some of their customers might desire to do it, even in the absence of any of any evidence of a reason to do so.

Some folks will not worry about it.

Some folks will becomes terrified of cell phones and not buy one.

But some folks will read some pop-sci nonsense about it, and be slightly worried, A method to "reduce exposure" might sound like a good compromise to such folks, "Well, I was a little concerned, but I can do this and be safer, and still get the benefits of owning a phone with less anxiety."

>At very high intensities it is harmful. It's harmless anywhere near the power cellphones transmit at.
You are making absolute statements that simply arent true. These things are hard to research properly because you cant just tape a smartphone to many peoples heads for several years and monitor the results. Most studies have been inconclusive but if anything they lean towards RF exposure from cell phones being harmful.
cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet
>This is the largest health-related case-control study of cell phone use and the risk of head and neck tumors. It was conducted by a consortium of researchers from 13 countries.
>Most published analyses from this study have shown no statistically significant increases in brain or central nervous system cancers related to higher amounts of cell phone use. One analysis showed a statistically significant, although modest, increase in the risk of glioma among the small proportion of study participants who spent the most total time on cell phone calls.

You skipped the last part of that paragraph
>However, the researchers considered this finding inconclusive because they felt that the amount of use reported by some respondents was unlikely and because the participants who reported lower levels of use appeared to have a slightly reduced risk of brain cancer compared with people who did not use cell phones regularly (5,10,11). Another recent analysis from this study found no relationship between brain tumor locations and regions of the brain that were exposed to the highest level of radiofrequency energy from cell phones (12).

Simple, just don't use a phone

Nigger I mentioned right in my post that almost all studies on the subject are inconclusive. If you genuinely believe that a specific frequency of EM radiation at high power is known to cause health problems, but at low power causes absolutely no issues, then you are a good goy who listens to your marketing overlords. Im not saying its a significant problem, its not something ive stopped usig my smartphone over, but to claim with absolute certainty that it causes absolutely no problems is incredibly naive. You do know what inconclusive means right? It means that after extensive research they still aren’t confident that its not correlated.

Dude ou can stop shilling. Nobody is paying you.

>In 2011, the International Agency for Research on CancerExit Disclaimer (IARC), a component of the World Health Organization, appointed an expert Working Group to review all available evidence on the use of cell phones. The Working Group classified cell phone use as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence from human studies, limited evidence from studies of radiofrequency energy and cancer in rodents, and inconsistent evidence from mechanistic studies (5).
From the same fucking source.
cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet

except your lamp is emiting visible light which is easily absorbed by your skin and the energy used for many biological processes, whereas cell phone radiation penetrates through your skin and skull, then excites brain matter which is filled with electric charges making neurons heat up and die
there is a lot of evidence cell phones increase risk of brain tumor, and the only evidence showing null effect is sponsored by cellphone companies

>"a possible carcinogenic to humans"
>"possible"

>except your lamp is emiting visible light which is easily absorbed by your skin and the energy used for many biological processes, whereas cell phone radiation penetrates through your skin and skull, then excites brain matter which is filled with electric charges making neurons heat up and die
LOL HOLY FUCK WHAT AM I READING

Actually, neurons don't work via electric charge. They actually work based on electronegative ion exchange, which is mechanistically completely different from electricity within a metallic matrix.

Also how retarded do you have to be to think that EM waves passing through us are necessarily more dangerous if they're lower energy/lower frequency? Also we don't absorb visible light's energy. No, you know the whole post you made is really hard to parse it's so retarded.

I think it's a shame that the issue can't be dealt with normally, because the layman associates "radiation" with nuclear radiation, and doesn't even realize that visible light is EM radiation. Those two effects means that reading a well-placed headline constructing of "New study shows cellphones release (unknown unit) of radiation directly into the brain. Criminally dangerous?" is all they need to be experts on the matter.

I'm not saying that necessarily there is no problem, or can be no problem- I'm a molecular bio guy, not a physics guy- but the issue seems to me more like a fearmongering issue than a health epidemic.

>we don't absorb visible light's energy

Okay, that was retarded, I'm tired. We absorb the energy as heat, but we don't absorb it as usable chemical energy for physiological processes.

So much retardation in this thread
Did you all know they use radiation to zap cancer cells inside your body?

Anyone should be able to understand that cell phone radiation passes through your body.

Anyone should also be able to understand that a cell phone signal passing through your body (which is mostly water) is attenuated to some degree. (if not, get a spectrum analyzer and an antenna and see how the antenna gain looks when obstructed by a bucket of water in an anechoic chamber)

With the above two facts, anyone should be able to understand that radiation passing through your body is absorbed to some degree.

Now the question is: Does bodily absorption of cell phone radiation increase the chance of cancer?

The consensus from the organizations discussed in

cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet

is that more research is needed before there can be a conclusive result.

Your safest bet is to keep your cell phone an arms length away when not out and about, not just for cancer reasons but because being glued to the phone is an addiction that is plaguing society.

t. radar engineer

>neurons don't work via electric charge
>how retarded do you have to be to think that EM waves passing through us are necessarily more dangerous if they're lower energy/lower frequency?
>we don't absorb visible light's energy
this is the state of EM denialists, you don't even have to argue with them and they'll BTFO themselves

Jokes on you. EM is not real. Light is made of corpuscles.

Guys, it's not dangerous, really... until you connect it to a microwave...

So “possible carcinogen” means perfectly inert with zero potential for health complications in your mind? What is life like with an IQ lower than your shoe size?

arent radio、micro waves supposed to be less energetic than ir? then what user said make sense

if you drink too much water you also get water poisoning

holy shit regulate water now

tv say phon maik booboo

daily reminder that your wifi router runs at the same frequency as your microwave and both generally run at a lower frequency than your cell phone (with the exception of 5G routers, which run at a higher frequency than your cellphone.)

Does your yoga teacher also told you about aluminium in vaccines ?

Water isn’t considered a possible carcinogen now is it?

Yep. I bet they managed to make even the water "possible carcinogen".

...

Sounds like advice you'd get from a QUACK!