Tremendous radiation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

kazile

New member
Dec 24, 2011
4
0
0
Visit site
Hey guys,

i recently read something about the SAR values of the 920, which shook me up.
I wonder why wpcentral did not mention it yet - at least i couldn't find an article about that.
Now i've cancelled my pre order because i'm concerned about that possible radiation level, which seems not to be "up to date", if you compare it to other phones.

Am I the only one with that kind of concerns?

cheers

some detailed reports
 

SnailUK

New member
Mar 1, 2012
1,006
1
0
Visit site
If the phone was remotely dangerous, nobody would certify it.

To be honest, almost all the hardware of the phone is off the shelf stuff shared by many other phones, so i'd be supprised if it was that much different to the 8X, Ativ S, and various Android phones.
 

kazile

New member
Dec 24, 2011
4
0
0
Visit site
hm, my posting of the website with an nive overview has to be checked by a mod.
next try:
smartphonesarlevels(dot)info, for example.
unfortunately there are brand new phones listed. there might be better rankings.

the thing is, that nobody can say, if your cell phone is dangerous but it seems to be better, if the radiation level is as low as possible. there are no long-term studies made yet regarding the potential risk when using a high SAR phone.
 

mmacleodbrown

New member
Sep 7, 2012
266
0
0
Visit site
If the phone was remotely dangerous, nobody would certify it.

To be honest, almost all the hardware of the phone is off the shelf stuff shared by many other phones, so i'd be supprised if it was that much different to the 8X, Ativ S, and various Android phones.

This +1
 

Jaybotics

New member
Sep 30, 2012
100
0
0
Visit site
If the phone was remotely dangerous, nobody would certify it.

To be honest, almost all the hardware of the phone is off the shelf stuff shared by many other phones, so i'd be supprised if it was that much different to the 8X, Ativ S, and various Android phones.

This +1.

I'm sorry you cancelled your preorder, lol.
 

anon(5335899)

New member
Jan 28, 2012
292
0
0
Visit site
So a well renowned institution sets up a scale which will tell you that a device is well withing suspected levels (there still is not a shred of proof any radiation from your phone can put you at risk of anything).

The 920 tests to a well acceptable and safe level which might be a bit higher then some, but still well within safe parameters and you panic? You serious or just trolling.

Eating a burger at mcDonalds would pose a bigger risk of getting sick here..
 

kazile

New member
Dec 24, 2011
4
0
0
Visit site
I searched the site and found 2 articles of George Ponder about SAR radiation:
LG Quantum leads the pack in radiation safety
and
Cellphone Radiation: The WHO's take on things
The popularity of those articles goes against 0. The ammount comments to those articles or the ammount of articles itself regarding that topic is vanishing low compared to reports of new unibody colours, larger screens and so on.
Thinking of that background it is no suprise, that i'm beeing asked if I would like to troll.

It is irritating, that the Lumia 900 with its value of 1.49, or the 920 with 1.36, or the Motorola Defy with its 1.52 (to mention a non wp phone) do not bring up questions, why the values are so high compared to devices like galaxy s3 (between 0.43 and 0.53), the s2 ( between 0.3 and 0.7) or my Omnia7 (around 0.6 i think) for example.

You can not say, that anything under 1.6 is not harmful, anything above this threshold is, nor why the threshold is placed at 1.6, but it sounds to me, like it would be better, if the threshold is as far away as possible.
Although you cannot just say that my Omnia7 is less harmful to me than an Lumia 920 would be.
It seems like no one likes to talk about that topic - neither cell phone manufacturers nor most of the people. Even those manufacturers offering phones with low SAR values don't mention it as a reason to buy their phones. Wired....
 

devize

New member
Oct 6, 2012
236
0
0
Visit site
It seems like no one likes to talk about that topic - neither cell phone manufacturers nor most of the people. Even those manufacturers offering phones with low SAR values don't mention it as a reason to buy their phones. Wired....

That's because most people don't care.
 

gsquared

New member
Jun 26, 2011
1,365
0
0
Visit site
I noticed the very same thing when looking at the 920 specs a few days back. Harmful or not I am also courious as to why the Nokia phones are so high.
 

Yakkaimono

New member
Sep 19, 2012
49
0
0
Visit site
According to the FCC if the SAR level is below 1.6 W/Kg the phone is safe and people have nothing to worry about.

1.6W/Kg is the maximum for USA and Australia
2 W/kg is the maximum for Europe

Funny thing here is that europe says 2 W/Kg is fine. And everyone should know that european regulations are almost always much stricter on these things than USA so since the 920 is well below 2W/Kg and 1.6 W/kg why should anyone be talking about it? Just because other phones have lower sar levels doesn't make the 920 a radiation hazard.

I personally never cared about all that sar level stuff. There are much more hazardous things in our everyday life.
 

DungMasterFang

New member
Apr 15, 2012
107
0
0
Visit site
Tin_foil_hat_2.jpg


Problem solved.
 

Panathas

New member
Oct 4, 2012
249
0
0
Visit site
There stands "maximum simultanious sar value = 1.36" That means, that this is the upper maximum right?
If i get it rigth, when you use your lumia as a wifi router, you get 1.31 ??
So could this 1.36 be the maximum value, if you use the phone as a router and doing other stuff?
I think the maximum value, if you hold it on your head in normal use is 1.15 ? I'm not an expert and have no time to read all the article, just looked on the table. Can someone confirm or disprove?
 

kazile

New member
Dec 24, 2011
4
0
0
Visit site
You can hardly state, that there are hazardous things in our everyday life, if you never cared about all that sar level stuff.

I think the manufacturers of low SAR phones do not advertise with that fact, because they know, that a thing which emits radiation, can never be 100% safe.
Those one who are producing high SAR phones just say, that their phones fulfill the requirements - thats it.

You can not be sure how the tresholds of 1.6 and 2.0 W/kg are estimated or which pressure group is responsible for that.
OK, i won't say radiation hazard to any phone, but it seems not to be an disadvantage, if a phone has the half or third SAR level than a competitive one. From a medical point of view. It is possible to manufacture phones with a low SAR value. It is sad that not everybody is trying that.

The carefreeness of some people is fascinating, as so their confidence in the authoritites.
 

palandri

Retired Moderator
Jul 25, 2009
7,586
3
0
Visit site
..and with that said, thread closed. Kazile you expressed your thoughts on it and others have expressed their thoughts on it. There is no use in arguing any more.

If we let threads like this go any longer fights break out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
323,236
Messages
2,243,501
Members
428,049
Latest member
Nathanboro12