iPhone 11 Pro said to emit twice the FCC's legal limit for RF radiation
An independent lab claims that the iPhone 11 Pro emits over twice the FCC's legal limit for radio frequency emissions -- but as before, there are more questions than answers surrounding the testing, and no demonstrable health danger to the public at all.
According to California-based RF Exposure Lab, the iPhone 11 Pro exposes users to a Specific Absorption Rate of 3.8W/kg. The FCC's legal limit is set to 1.6W/kg. The tests were performed using the FCC's guidelines that suggest the iPhone should be tested from five millimeters away, but other testing methodologies are unclear at this time. For instance, it isn't clear if proximity sensors designed to reduce the broadcast RF power were triggered properly, or at all.
Previous iPhones had been the subject of similar scrutiny. Several had been the subject of a class-action lawsuit. However, the FCC performed a retest on the iPhones in question, which proved they operate within the legal limits.
All of the devices tested at the FCC's own lab -- not a contractor -- were under the maximum legal limit of 1.6 watts per kilogram or less, over 1 gram of tissue that is absorbing the most signal. The legal limit is derived from a safe limit, which is about 50 times higher.
Federal limits for RF exposure to the populace are extremely conservative, and the testing is performed in absolute worst-case conditions. While the levels seen by the experiment are above that limit, the iPhone models in question do not pose a safety or health hazard.
The US government sets several limits on exposure to just about everything. One is a safe limit, a second is an occupational limit, and the third is a non-occupational limit. In the case of radiofrequency exposure like from the iPhone, the occupational limit for industry workers is 10% of the safe limit, with the non-occupational limit set at 2% of the safe limit.
The US Food and Drug Administration has been running studies for 15 years on the subject. The FDA points out that there have been some studies showing minor effects from the devices, but they aren't reproducible. Both the FDA and WHO note that given the profoundly low levels of energy involved, it is nearly impossible to eliminate other causes producing the biological effects in the studies that did find an effect.
Those still concerned about RF exposure from an iPhone can use the speaker feature on the device to limit your exposure. Paradoxically, cases advertised as "RF shielding" force the iPhone to broadcast with more power and for longer duration to find and connect to Wi-Fi or wireless networks.
According to California-based RF Exposure Lab, the iPhone 11 Pro exposes users to a Specific Absorption Rate of 3.8W/kg. The FCC's legal limit is set to 1.6W/kg. The tests were performed using the FCC's guidelines that suggest the iPhone should be tested from five millimeters away, but other testing methodologies are unclear at this time. For instance, it isn't clear if proximity sensors designed to reduce the broadcast RF power were triggered properly, or at all.
Previous iPhones had been the subject of similar scrutiny. Several had been the subject of a class-action lawsuit. However, the FCC performed a retest on the iPhones in question, which proved they operate within the legal limits.
All of the devices tested at the FCC's own lab -- not a contractor -- were under the maximum legal limit of 1.6 watts per kilogram or less, over 1 gram of tissue that is absorbing the most signal. The legal limit is derived from a safe limit, which is about 50 times higher.
Federal limits for RF exposure to the populace are extremely conservative, and the testing is performed in absolute worst-case conditions. While the levels seen by the experiment are above that limit, the iPhone models in question do not pose a safety or health hazard.
The US government sets several limits on exposure to just about everything. One is a safe limit, a second is an occupational limit, and the third is a non-occupational limit. In the case of radiofrequency exposure like from the iPhone, the occupational limit for industry workers is 10% of the safe limit, with the non-occupational limit set at 2% of the safe limit.
The US Food and Drug Administration has been running studies for 15 years on the subject. The FDA points out that there have been some studies showing minor effects from the devices, but they aren't reproducible. Both the FDA and WHO note that given the profoundly low levels of energy involved, it is nearly impossible to eliminate other causes producing the biological effects in the studies that did find an effect.
Those still concerned about RF exposure from an iPhone can use the speaker feature on the device to limit your exposure. Paradoxically, cases advertised as "RF shielding" force the iPhone to broadcast with more power and for longer duration to find and connect to Wi-Fi or wireless networks.
Comments
I heard about the independent lab. It’s called Samsung Mobile Communication.
You may note we have discounted the findings.
We're getting ahead of this one, because you'll see it soon elsewhere, like the Chicago Tribune testing from 2019.
Cell Phones
All cell phone models must be tested to meet the SAR requirements for most all countries around the world. All bands and technologies are tested or evaluated against the requirements. The phone is tested using a phantom head on both the right and left side of the head in a touch configuration. The phone is also tested with the phone touching the ear and tilted away from the cheek 15º. The phone is then moved to a flat phantom to simulate the phone next to the body. It is tested with a specified separation distance, which is included in the user’s guide. The US requirements are listed in OET bulletin 65 Supplement C, KDB 447498, KDB 648474 and KDB 941225. The testing procedure for a handset is described in IEEE1528-2005. The EU requirements are listed in IEC 62209 Parts 1 and 2.
It appears the tests were done for Penumbra Brands who just happen to sell radiation-blocking cell phone cases.
So with that in mind another quote FWIW:
"Cellphone testing is self-regulated—the manufacturer supplies a phone to an independent lab for testing, and if the phone passes, the FCC approves the device for release. However, when we bought an iPhone ‘off-the-shelf’ and tested it the same way, RF Exposure Lab found it fails the FCC’s safety limit.”
"An independent lab claims that the iPhone 11 Pro emits over twice the FCC's legal limit for radio frequency emissions -- but as before, there are more questions than answers surrounding the testing, and no demonstrable health danger to the public at all."
The headline is accurate. There is somebody saying that the iPhone 11 Pro broadcasts at more than the FCC legal limit. You'd really have to squint hard to attribute that testing and statement to AI, given what the second sentence right below the headline says.
Apple tested at the minimum required distance (5mm?) while Samsung iirc tested at the maximum distance (15mm).
Marketplace even ran their own tests using a gel head to make sure the proximity sensors worked and confirmed the manufacturers passed.
/s
I've said it before, I don't want a Navy search radar in my bedroom, but to call this level dangerous or injurious in any way is irresponsible and straight wrong.
b) In addition to checking their work, I'd be very interested to obtain a list of RF Exposure Lab and Penumbra Brands employees who are selling short on Apple stock. I smell straight-up stock manipulation here.
A minor story like this wouldn't move AAPL more than a couple of pennies if even that.