Apple, Samsung slapped with class action over handset RF emissions

AppleInsider

That was fast. Two days after a Chicago Tribune investigation found many contemporary mobile phones, including late-model iPhones, do not comply with radio frequency emissions standards, Apple and Samsung are being sued over alleged damages and problems related to RF exposure.

Cellphone being tested by RF Exposure Lab. | Source: Chicago Tribune

The class action suit, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Friday, claims RF radiation emitted from smartphone devices designed and manufactured by Apple and Samsung exceed legal limits set forth by the Federal Communications Commission. Further, the case takes issue with marketing materials that claim the products operate within regulated guidelines, with neither company issuing warnings about potential negative health effects related to the allegedly high RF emissions.

"Numerous recent scientific publications, supported by hundreds of scientists worldwide, have shown that RF radiation exposure affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines," the filing reads. "Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans."

The suit relies almost exclusively on results from an independent study performed by RF Exposure Lab on behalf of the Chicago Tribune. A report published on Wednesday notes exposure from devices including iPhone 7, iPhone 8, iPhone X and recent Galaxy smartphone models exceeded federally mandated limits in a number of tests.

Plaintiffs argue Apple "covered up any risks by misrepresenting the safety of the smartphones" and misled customers by not informing them of potential ill effects from iPhone's RF exposure.

The complaint notes Apple has in past declared RF exposure information, including Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), for public viewing and provided recommendations defining the closest distance at which a user should carry the device. According to the filing, the company stopped furnishing such information with the release of the iPhone 7.

For its part, Apple in a statement to The Tribune disputed the paper's findings, saying they "were inaccurate due to the test setup not being in accordance with procedures necessary to properly assess the iPhone models."

"All iPhone models, including iPhone 7, are fully certified by the FCC and in every other country where iPhone is sold," the company added. "After careful review and subsequent validation of all iPhone models tested in the (Tribune) report, we confirmed we are in compliance and meet all applicable exposure guidelines and limits."

Named class plaintiffs include owners of Apple's iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8 and iPhone X, and Samsung's Galaxy S8 and Galaxy Note 8. Attached to the suit are Chicago-based lawyers Beth Fegan and Timothy A. Scott, partners at law firm Fegan Scott which on Thursday put a call out to potential class candidates.

"The fact that the Chicago Tribune can convene a group of experts and develop such convincing findings shows that the phone manufacturers may be intentionally hiding what they know about radiation output," Fegan said in a statement Thursday. "This could be the Chernobyl of the cell phone industry, cover-up and all."

Along with the suit, The Tribune's findings prompted the FCC to conduct its own testing of the reportedly non-compliant devices.

Plaintiffs seek class status, injunctive relief and damages including costs of medical monitoring, restitutions and wrongfully obtained revenue.

RF Exposure Class Action by Mikey Campbell on Scribd

georgie01

This seems like a lawsuit reaching for something that doesn’t exist ... unless I’m missing something, it is one of the weakest I’ve seen in a long time.

edited August 2019

mobird

A little bit dramatic in my opinion.

"This could be the Chernobyl of the cell phone industry, cover-up and all."

appleexposed

Apple news: "RFGate!! Apple is killing their customers!!!!!"

Samsung news: .......

tekfranz

Everytime they turn down transmit power on cell phones and towers we lose coverage for a couple of years. 

I hope this this does not result in some new lower cellular SAR standard. Just put the warning booklets back in the phone boxes.

edited August 2019

esquirecats

I’m guessing that the FCC and the world’s best manufacturers of mobile phones are better at measuring RF than a lab that was engaged for the sole purpose of a story.
Having that reality come out in a court room seems like a hideous waste of court time and public funds. 

edited August 2019

kuyangkoh

georgie01 said:

This seems like a lawsuit reaching for something that doesn’t exist ... unless I’m missing something, it is one of the weakest I’ve seen in a long time.

Yes.....this Attorney are just like cobra waiting to strikes on anything that move, including air, 

racerhomie3

I want answers. A lawsuit & its findings will help us get the results. I trust independent labs rather than ‘apple’ sanctioned labs.Whoever did the lawsuit , thank you 🙏 

wonkothesane

racerhomie3 said:

I want answers. A lawsuit & its findings will help us get the results. I trust independent labs rather than ‘apple’ sanctioned labs.Whoever did the lawsuit , thank you 🙏 

It is perfectly normal for manufacturers to use their own labs for testing in order to check for compliance with the relevant standards. This is, because in the end it is their own responsibility to ensure product conformity.  And safety. 

This is true for about any products except for airplanes and medical products. 

Products are also usually tested independently by accredited labs and institutes, either e.g. to obtain release in specific countries, or simply as an ongoing random sample test. 

Also, usually for every limit value stated in a standard you have a designed nominal value in your product (lower than that limit) in order to take into account production variation. 

Often, disputes over violations of limits stem from either the variation or the way that specific value was measured. While usually very elaborate and precise, they are not in each and every case without room for interpretation. 

lowededwookie

Frankly it should be Qualcomm that is getting sued on account of them being the ones making the radio gear.

macgui

After reading this article, I'm getting headaches from my iPhone.

Don't call my doctor! Call my lawyer. He'll call my doctor!

jdw

Unless I'm mistaken, it seems the Chicago Tribune is to blame for indirectly initiating the lawsuit.  They tested differently than Apple or Samsung did.  From what I understand, at the time Apple tested and passed FCC, it didn't have to test under conditions that would have the phone right up against human skin, which seems to be how Chicago Tribune tested.  I also read that one Samsung phone was 5 times over the FCC limit, yet hardly anyone is talking about that and most of the news I see is bashing the iPhone, especially the iPhone 7.  I highly doubt that Apple circumvented the FCC by submitting a phone that produced lower emissions than production iPhones.

davgreg

I work in the field of Medical Radiology and would offer this:

Some health effects from exposure to various forms of radiation are slow to develop where others are quickly apparent. One can get an immediate burn from certain doses of radiation where a lower dose, over time, can produce different health effects. The delayed effects can take many decades to become apparent.

I am not taking a side in this and suspect these ambulance chasers are motivated by deep pocket money more than protecting the public. However, do not dismiss concerns about frequent low level exposure to radiation out of hand. Beyond cancers, radiation exposure from x-rays has been linked to things like cataracts. Although the power levels of a cell phone are relatively small, operating cell phones are commonly held against the head and the potency of the radiation follows the inverse square.

There is a repeating story where technologies are often used before the health impacts are properly understood. Within living memory of some, fluoroscopes were used to sell and size shoes- something that is unimaginable today.

Beyond the tin foil hat crowd and the ambulance chasers there is a place for serious study and consideration of the potential adverse health effects of holding a radio device so close to your head and in your pocket- close to your reproductive organs - frequently. You should not be fearful or alarmed, but should pay attention to well done scientific study.

hydrogen

davgreg said:

I work in the field of Medical Radiology and would offer this:

Some health effects from exposure to various forms of radiation are slow to develop where others are quickly apparent. One can get an immediate burn from certain doses of radiation where a lower dose, over time, can produce different health effects. The delayed effects can take many decades to become apparent.

I am not taking a side in this and suspect these ambulance chasers are motivated by deep pocket money more than protecting the public. However, do not dismiss concerns about frequent low level exposure to radiation out of hand. Beyond cancers, radiation exposure from x-rays has been linked to things like cataracts. Although the power levels of a cell phone are relatively small, operating cell phones are commonly held against the head and the potency of the radiation follows the inverse square.

There is a repeating story where technologies are often used before the health impacts are properly understood. Within living memory of some, fluoroscopes were used to sell and size shoes- something that is unimaginable today.

Beyond the tin foil hat crowd and the ambulance chasers there is a place for serious study and consideration of the potential adverse health effects of holding a radio device so close to your head and in your pocket- close to your reproductive organs - frequently. You should not be fearful or alarmed, but should pay attention to well done scientific study.

Perfectly balanced opinion, thanks. But if industry has to comply with applicable requirements (which is the underlying point behind the class action), the legitimate question on whether these requirements are enough is another issue, which is much beyond the control of industry, and directly addresses the public health services, who are in charge of defining the applicable legislation.

edited August 2019

mplsp

mobird said:

A little bit dramatic in my opinion.

"This could be the Chernobyl of the cell phone industry, cover-up and all."

Yeah. I’ve never seen a trial lawyer exaggerate or be over-dramatic before.

The thing with RF fields is they can be variable and subject to outside interference. Unless the testing methodology was strictly dictated and standardized (and maybe even then,) It’s very possible that the labs that initially did the test for Apple and Samsung got acceptable results while the lab that the Chicago tribune used got slightly different results. Then there’s the proximity sensor and whether it was engaged as well as whether it functions as intended, both for the test and in real life use. (I recall the VW diesel scandal a few years back where VW did the reverse and altered the engine operation when a testing computer was connected to make it look like it ran cleaner when it was taking the test.) Of course, none of this justifies the ambulance chasers at this point. 

The higher the frequency of radio waves, the more energy and the more likely they are to cause damage (which is why the above tests were done at the highest frequency.) Part of the 5G spec involves higher frequencies than currently used, so as everyone races to 5G they will also be racing towards something potentially more harmful. 

edited August 2019

lkrupp

racerhomie3 said:

I want answers. A lawsuit & its findings will help us get the results. I trust independent labs rather than ‘apple’ sanctioned labs.Whoever did the lawsuit , thank you 🙏 

I assume you will immediately stop using your wireless products until years of research have completed and you have your answers. To do otherwise would be disgustingly hypocritical of you would it not? Your absence from this forum will let us know you decided correctly.

2770 lorca

If that is the case, cars SHOULD have been forbidden because of the emissions and electronics. Idem for Tobacco companies, which incidentally have won al courts cases, and on and on. We humans, we have been living since beginning of times under the stress of the lions, natural disasters, solar radiations, stress, or simply, politicians (lol). We have survived; see happen now with the global warming. I guess this is how solicitors make money.

tome

Just put the telephones on Speaker or move them slightly away from your ear.  The RF signal decays Exponentially with Distance from the Radiation Source.  Same as for the power lines near your home - move away from them and then there is no possible problem.

mike wuerthele

MplsP said:

mobird said:

A little bit dramatic in my opinion.

"This could be the Chernobyl of the cell phone industry, cover-up and all."

Yeah. I’ve never seen a trial lawyer exaggerate or be over-dramatic before.

The thing with RF fields is they can be variable and subject to outside interference. Unless the testing methodology was strictly dictated and standardized (and maybe even then,) It’s very possible that the labs that initially did the test for Apple and Samsung got acceptable results while the lab that the Chicago tribune used got slightly different results. Then there’s the proximity sensor and whether it was engaged as well as whether it functions as intended, both for the test and in real life use. (I recall the VW diesel scandal a few years back where VW did the reverse and altered the engine operation when a testing computer was connected to make it look like it ran cleaner when it was taking the test.) Of course, none of this justifies the ambulance chasers at this point. 

The higher the frequency of radio waves, the more energy and the more likely they are to cause damage (which is why the above tests were done at the highest frequency.) Part of the 5G spec involves higher frequencies than currently used, so as everyone races to 5G they will also be racing towards something potentially more harmful. 

That's an okay generalization from a straight physics standpoint, but biological manifestations are not as simple as that.

edited August 2019

ios_guy80

TomE said:

Just put the telephones on Speaker or move them slightly away from your ear.  The RF signal decays Exponentially with Distance from the Radiation Source.  Same as for the power lines near your home - move away from them and then there is no possible problem.

Wear AirPods?

pscooter63

iOS_Guy80 said:

TomE said:

Just put the telephones on Speaker or move them slightly away from your ear.  The RF signal decays Exponentially with Distance from the Radiation Source.  Same as for the power lines near your home - move away from them and then there is no possible problem.

Wear AirPods?

Now you’ve done it.