Obama's most freely distributed Government phone Assurance JAX, Emits highest Radiation levels

reviews.cnet.com...



Why pick the phone with the 4th highest radiation emission levels of all phones on the world market, for distributing to low income/welfare families?



www.jagatreview.com...

Top 20 cell phones with the highest levels of radiation:

No Manufacturer /Model SAR Level (Digital)
1 Motorola V195s 1.6
2 Motorola Zine ZN5 1.59
3 Motorola Rival 1.59
4 Kyocera Jax S1300 1.55
5 Motorola VU204 1.55
6 RIM Blackberry Curve 8330 (Sprint) 1.54
7 RIM Blackberry Curve 8330 (U.S Cellular) 1.54
8 RIM Blackberry Curve 8330 (Verizon Wireless) 1.54
9 Motorola Crush 1.53
10 Nokia E71x 1.53
11 Pantech Matrix 1.52
12 LG Rumor 2 1.51
13 RIM Blackberrry Bold 1.51
14 HTC SMT 5800 1.49
15 Motorola Droid 1.49
16 Sony Ericsson W350a 1.48
17 LG Chocolate Touch 1.47
18 Nokia 2320 GoPhone 1.47
19 Palm Pixi Plus (Verizone Wireless) 1.47
20 T-Mobile Dash 3G 1.47

FCC obtained the above data by measuring the SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) from each corresponding phone as it was used close to the ear. To pass the FCC’s standard, a phone must emit a radiation level of less than or equal to SAR 1,6 watt per kilogram (w/kg). Naturally, the research was limited to cell phone models that were released in the United States.

Now, notice the STARK CONTRAST with the phones with the lowest reported radiation emissions:

ow about low-radiation cell phones? As it turned out, the FCC also managed to find models with friendlier levels of radiation:
No Manufacturer/Model SAR Level (Digital)
1 Beyond E-tech E6 0.109
2 Samsung Eternity SGH-A867 0.194
3 Samsung Blue Earth 0.196
4 Samsung SGH-GH800 0.23
5 Samsung Soul 0.24
6 Samsung Impresion SGH A-887 0.27
7 Samsung Innov8 0.287
8 Beyond E-Tech Duet D888 0.32
9 Samsung SGH-T299 0.383
10 Doro PhoneEasy 410 0.445
11 Motorola Devour 0.45
12 Samsung SGH-A167 0.452
13 Samsung SGH-i450 0.457
14 Samsung Rugby SGH-A837 (AT&T) 0.46
15 Samsung Propel Pro 0.473
16 Samsung Freeform 0.48
17 Samsung Gravity 0.487
18 HTC Imagio (Verizon Wireless) 0.489
19 Samsung Flight SGH-A797 0.505
20 Samsung Alias 2 SCH-U750 0.541



That article is from 2010 there's a few newer models out with even much lower radiation emission, ie the Samsung 'Soul' emitting only 0.24 of SAR level.

Given its long-term effects nature, cell phone radiation is especially dangerous for children who are still in the developmental stage of their growth, as the damage caused by it will accumulate overtime. Thirty percent of cell phone users are children and they lie vulnerable to the radiation. After ten years of cell phone usage, children (or, perhaps by then, teenagers or adults) may start showing off symptoms of radiation-related health issues, according to one research.

Interesting, there are Ni apple products in the survey.
Wonder where they fall in at.

Wonder why too. Perhaps smartphones in general with their wifi and bulk and what not, in general produce more SAR than some of the smaller handsets? But still the JAX produces more..

and as far as Apple there is only one Apple phone anyway , the iPhone? in its various Generation release versions but all the same iPhone.

Below link shows the HTC Evo 4G emits less SAR than Apple iPhone 4G. That in itself is a shame since most Americans and people in general seem to have iPhones, not HTCs. Go figure

Bottom line is

1) Why is the Government free phone plan pushing the 4th highest Radiation emitting phone?

2) Apple iPhone and Verizon Motorola DROID are the most popular phones I see people with, and they also happen to be up there in SAR, again higher than most HTC and most Samsung models. Why don't people go for the lowest radiation levels emitters. Guess they generally don't really care about whatever difference?

www.phonearena.com...

reply to post by BiggerPicture


they wanna kill us.

Are they allowed to sell these phones. Is the highest level a dangerous level -- or are these phones designed and produced for this program? Otherwise I don't see/nor believe you have a point much beyond an email from crazy aunt Cecil.

LOL since when does capitalist "allowed" justify a 'point'?

reply to post by spyder550


There's no scientific proof beyond a number of highly contested studies. Nothing even remotely concrete proving a connection between cell phones and cancer. And besides, literally everything has been found to cause cancer these days. I don't take any of it outside ionizing radiation and industrial toxins seriously anymore. When people try to tell me wood dust can be a carcinogen, I tend to be more than a bit skeptical.

I do not know about cancer, but when I talk on my iphone a while I always get a headache.
Never happened on the land line.

Originally posted by ShadeWolf
reply to post by spyder550

 

There's no scientific proof beyond a number of highly contested studies. Nothing even remotely concrete proving a connection between cell phones and cancer. And besides, literally everything has been found to cause cancer these days. I don't take any of it outside ionizing radiation and industrial toxins seriously anymore. When people try to tell me wood dust can be a carcinogen, I tend to be more than a bit skeptical.

Hmm yeah im not sure what to think why they would pick the highest SAR emission unit to distribute to the masses,

despite there being 'no scientific proof' it will do any 'good'

reply to post by BiggerPicture


The reason is pretty simple: shielding is pricey. They want to make this phone available to everybody at a low price point, so it's not as heavily insulated.

reply to post by BiggerPicture


The real question is why is the government giving free phones to anybody?

Yale researchers exposed mice to a muted, silenced, cell phone for all 19 days of their pregnancy and found that there were changes in the brain similar to what is seen in ADHD. The offspring had hyperactivity and less memory.

Conclusion? Data on cell phone health issues is slowly surfacing. It may be related to brain tumors and a variety of behavioral disorders.