• Mobile phones in India will carry radiation tags and health warnings
    41 replies, posted
[Release] New Delhi, Dec 23 (TruthDive): The Indian Government is enforcing strict norms to control harmful radiations emitted by mobile handsets. According to norms, handset manufacturers will have to display prominently the radiation level emitted from the cell phone. As the present radiation levels are injurious to health, this new move is expected to benefit over 900 million mobile phone subscribers. Mobile phones will soon come with radiation tags and health warnings. The mobile subscribers will be the direct beneficiaries of stringent new government norms. The general consumers are unaware of the harm that mobile phone radiations can cause to them. Mobile handsets emit harmful Electro-Magnetic Frequency (EMF) radiation, which can cause severe health hazards. The government is looking at educating people about the various ways in which a cell phone can be avoided. It wants to enforce the benefits of hands-free, usage of SMSs instead of voice calls and also issue health warnings for adolescents, children, pregnant women and others who have any kind of medical implants. The manufacturer will also have to necessarily display the Specific Absorption rate (SAR) value information of the mobile handset on its website along with the handset manual. Also, it will be compulsory to provide information on SAR values to mobile subscribers when they are buying the handset. All the mobile handsets that will be manufactured or sold in India or even imported from other countries will have to be checked for compliance of the SAR limit. The companies manufacturing handsets in India will be required to self-declare SAR value of each handset. In case of imported handsets, apart from self-declaration of SAR value, manufacturers will have to specify the SAR information in their documentation and an appropriate authority will verify them. A final list of SAR values of different mobile phones will be uploaded on the DoT and TEC websites. So far, India along with Europe, Japan, Taiwan and Australia have followed ICNIRP standards, while markets such as the United States, Canada and South Africa follow IEEE standards. The government also wants the instructions in the consumer handset booklet or user manual to contain five new safety precautions. These include: • Use a wireless, hands-free system with a low power Bluetooth emitter; • Ensure that cellphone has a low SAR; • Keep voice calls short or send text messages instead – an advice that applies especially to children, adolescents and pregnant women; • Use cellphone when signal quality is good; and finally • People with active medical implants should preferably keep mobile handsets at least 15cms away from the implant.[/release] [editline]24th December 2011[/editline] [url]http://truthdive.com/2011/12/23/mobile-phones-in-india-will-carry-radiation-tags-and-health-warnings.html[/url]
Mobile phones emit radiation?
[QUOTE=BloodFox1222;33862686]Mobile phones emit radiation?[/QUOTE] A lot of things emit radiation, but cell phones do more than others.
Jesus fucknig christ.It's proven that cell phones don't cause health problems !!!.I am fed up with this non-sense.
I thought it was already proven that mobile phones do not cause cancer.
I remember seeing a study that using a mobile phone causes something to the brain, I think it mentioned heating the brain slightly and causing deteriorations on people who use it for extended periods of time. But that was at least two years ago, I don't know if it's been disproven.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiation[/url]
This is retarded, and unfounded. Such a waste of time and resources putting these "warnings" out.
Everything above 0 Kelvin emits radiation. Mobile phones do not emit ionizing radiation. Idiots.
Im sure the 3 people who can afford phones there will be thrilled.[sp]this is obviously a joke you slack-jawed imbeciles.[/sp]
The ground emits more radiation than cell phones :V
[QUOTE=MightyMax;33863382]Im sure the 3 people who can afford phones there will be thrilled.[/QUOTE] Yeah, because every country outside north america and europe is a third world country right?
Please tell me this is satire
[QUOTE=SappinMyNick;33863747]Yeah, because every country outside north america and europe is a third world country right?[/QUOTE]Umm, duh?
Oh dear god How much dumb shit can idiots push into people Its NON-IONIZING radiation dammit, there has been such a rediclous amount of science-money-whoring around cell phones for ages
Augh, electrons won't absorb energy unless the energy packet is enough to push them up to the next energy state. Radio waves + micro waves of the frequency mobile phones use don't contain nearly enough energy to do that so the electrons aren't gonna absorb them, meaning that the waves emitted by mobile phones are non ionising radiation and are not cancer causing. You'd actually be more at risk of getting cancer by being in direct sunlight than you would by having a mobile phone at the side of your head 24/7 Jesus christ it's almost like these people don't understand quantum physics
[QUOTE=MightyMax;33863382]Im sure the 3 people who can afford phones there will be thrilled.[/QUOTE] I think you're wrongly assuming that [I]everyone[/I] who buys a phone nowadays buys expensive new hightech Smartphones. There are lots and lots of relatively low-tech phones in the market which are very affordable, even for poorer people. In fact most people only need phones for calls and maybe SMS messaging. That's it. So people with a low budget have the option of buying new, cheap and low-tech phones or just buying older phones. (Maybe even acquire a second hand phone when someone in the family buys a newer one.)
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;33862738]I thought it was already proven that mobile phones do not cause cancer.[/QUOTE] just an fyi, science is great and all, but that study was non-scientific as anything that claims to prove a negative is [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Turnips5;33862864][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiation[/url][/QUOTE] UV is mostly non-ionizing but it causes cancer explain why, I seriously don't know
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33864197]UV is mostly non-ionizing but it causes cancer explain why, I seriously don't know[/QUOTE] UV breaks certain bonds which creates free radicals. Radicals aren't ions, so ( most ) UV is non ionising.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33864197]UV is mostly non-ionizing but it causes cancer explain why, I seriously don't know[/QUOTE] I explained this once or twice before All electromagnetic radiation (radio waves, microwaves, infrared, visible light, UV, x-rays, gamma rays etc.) is found in discrete "bits" called photons. Each photon has an associated energy, and the higher the frequency of the radiation, the higher the energy of the photon. UV light has a higher frequency than visible light, therefore its photons have higher energies than those of visible light. -An ion is an atom which is either has too many or too few electrons. -"Ionising" means that a photon of radiation has enough energy to knock an electron directly out of an atom (which could be in a molecule such as DNA), turning it into an ion. The cancer-causing mechanism involving ionising radiation has DNA getting directly hit by ionising packets of radiation. This fucks up the chemical structure of the DNA molecule and can occasionally lead to a cell going nuts and not knowing when to stop replicating: cancer. UVA (the type of UV radiation you're talking about) cannot directly knock electrons out of atoms, BUT it can cause a certain type of molecule to break in half perfectly, which leaves "free radicals" - these aren't ions, but they have a single electron in an outer energy level which can react with things (including DNA), and THIS is what causes the cancer in the case of UVA. This explains why UVA can only give you skin cancer, while ionising radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays can give you cancer deep within the body (Actually, I'm not sure it does really - I think UVA is likely to be absorbed by said certain molecules before it can penetrate very deep, but that might not have anything to do with it) [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] from wikipedia : [quote]UVA does not damage DNA directly like UVB and UVC, but it can generate highly reactive chemical intermediates, such as hydroxyl and oxygen radicals, which in turn can damage DNA.[/quote] [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] I can't fight the urge to turn everything into a physics lesson
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33864436]I explained this once or twice before All electromagnetic radiation (radio waves, microwaves, infrared, visible light, UV, x-rays, gamma rays etc.) is found in discrete "bits" called photons. Each photon has an associated energy, and the higher the frequency of the radiation, the higher the energy of the photon. UV light has a higher frequency than visible light, therefore its photons have higher energies than those of visible light. -An ion is an atom which is either has too many or too few electrons. -"Ionising" means that a photon of radiation has enough energy to knock an electron directly out of an atom (which could be in a molecule such as DNA), turning it into an ion. The cancer-causing mechanism involving ionising radiation has DNA getting directly hit by ionising packets of radiation. This fucks up the chemical structure of the DNA molecule and can occasionally lead to a cell going nuts and not knowing when to stop replicating: cancer. UVA (the type of UV radiation you're talking about) cannot directly knock electrons out of atoms, BUT it can cause a certain type of molecule to break in half perfectly, which leaves "free radicals" - these aren't ions, but they have a single electron in an outer energy level which can react with things (including DNA), and THIS is what causes the cancer in the case of UVA. This explains why UVA can only give you skin cancer, while ionising radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays can give you cancer deep within the body (Actually, I'm not sure it does really - I think UVA is likely to be absorbed by said certain molecules before it can penetrate very deep, but that might not have anything to do with it) [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] from wikipedia : [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] I can't fight the urge to turn everything into a physics lesson[/QUOTE] Well its informative. And give more ammo to use against my friend when he brings up his whole "cell phones cause cancer" spiel.
[QUOTE=Demache;33865080]Well its informative. And give more ammo to use against my friend when he brings up his whole "cell phones cause cancer" spiel.[/QUOTE] Make sure you understand it all or your argument will be less than convincing
India has the largest user of blackberry phones.
[QUOTE=Ignhelper;33869039]India has the largest user of blackberry phones.[/QUOTE] Height or weight-wise?
[QUOTE=BloodFox1222;33862686]Mobile phones emit radiation?[/QUOTE] Non-ionizing radiation, yes. The article is so bum-fuck stupid it makes me want to chomp on a pencil of plutonium.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33864436] UVA (the type of UV radiation you're talking about) cannot directly knock electrons out of atoms, BUT it can cause a certain type of molecule to break in half perfectly, which leaves "free radicals" - these aren't ions, but they have a single electron in an outer energy level which can react with things (including DNA), and THIS is what causes the cancer in the case of UVA.[/QUOTE] this part is neat why doesn't the molecule that gets split up just bind together again
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33864436]I explained this once or twice before All electromagnetic radiation (radio waves, microwaves, infrared, visible light, UV, x-rays, gamma rays etc.) is found in discrete "bits" called photons. Each photon has an associated energy, and the higher the frequency of the radiation, the higher the energy of the photon. UV light has a higher frequency than visible light, therefore its photons have higher energies than those of visible light. -An ion is an atom which is either has too many or too few electrons. -"Ionising" means that a photon of radiation has enough energy to knock an electron directly out of an atom (which could be in a molecule such as DNA), turning it into an ion. The cancer-causing mechanism involving ionising radiation has DNA getting directly hit by ionising packets of radiation. This fucks up the chemical structure of the DNA molecule and can occasionally lead to a cell going nuts and not knowing when to stop replicating: cancer. UVA (the type of UV radiation you're talking about) cannot directly knock electrons out of atoms, BUT it can cause a certain type of molecule to break in half perfectly, which leaves "free radicals" - these aren't ions, but they have a single electron in an outer energy level which can react with things (including DNA), and THIS is what causes the cancer in the case of UVA. This explains why UVA can only give you skin cancer, while ionising radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays can give you cancer deep within the body (Actually, I'm not sure it does really - I think UVA is likely to be absorbed by said certain molecules before it can penetrate very deep, but that might not have anything to do with it) [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] from wikipedia : [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] I can't fight the urge to turn everything into a physics lesson[/QUOTE] UVA is also pretty much the borderline region where radiation even becomes harmful. Also, because of the relation between energy and frequency (E = hf) visible light has a much higher energy than any of the spectrums that mobile phones operate in (radio and microwave frequencies). As such it stands to reason that if radiowaves or microwaves packed enough energy to could cause serious, long term, possibly irreparable damage visible light would do the same kind of damage to an even greater degree. As this is certainly not the case, it's only logical to conclude that all frequencies of radiation below the frequency of visible light are for the most part safe (I say for the most part because microwaves are kind of the exception when they're abundant enough and at the right frequency, but that's another story that's only semi-related). [editline]24th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;33869242]this part is neat why doesn't the molecule that gets split up just bind together again[/QUOTE] It's probably a probability thing (no pun intended there). You'll probably find that a certain proportion of the free radicals do reform into nice, safe molecules, while others just happen to have a specific electron density to provide repulsion during the splitting which results in the two halves flying apart. Pretty much anything that occurs in terms of particle collision/interaction in chemistry or physics winds up being explained by probability.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33869242]this part is neat why doesn't the molecule that gets split up just bind together again[/QUOTE] You're right, it's perfectly possible for two free radicals to join up again and react, but it's more likely for the two parts to just shoot off in different directions and meet up with something else before that happens. There certainly won't be much of an attractive force felt between free radicals since they're uncharged.
Larger electromagnetic wavelengths have more energy than smaller ones. Radio waves are the lowest on the chart, and yet everybody seems to bicker about them and not give a shit about oh, say, [B]fucking visible light[/b].
Also Sltungle, I was just going to say something about visible light - if you're worried about microwaves causing cancer, you might as well be worried about infrared and visible light too :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.