On Tuesday, the French watchdog which governs radio frequencies also told the tech giant to fix existing phones.
The ANFR has advised Apple that if it cannot resolve the issue via a software update, it must recall every iPhone 12 ever sold in the country.
But the World Health Organization has previously sought to allay fears about radiation emitted by mobile phones.
Apple told the BBC it was contesting the ANFR’s review, and said it had provided the regulator with lab results from the tech giant itself and third parties which show the device is compliant with all the relevant rules.
France’s digital minister Jean-Noel Barrot told French newspaper Le Parisien the decision was due to radiation levels above the acceptable threshold, according to Reuters.
It comes as the Chinese foreign ministry issued a rebuttal against media reports which claimed government agencies had told staff to stop using iPhones.
The original article contains 477 words, the summary contains 149 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I’m far more likely to believe they screwed up the retest than I am that France suddenly found something everyone else missed. Also 4 watts is nothing. I’d maybe start to get a little worried if it was putting out 40 watts, although even that much is still pretty minimal.
It produces zero radiation like a nuclear reactor and only a little more energy than WiFi. This energy’s only effect is to heat adjacent tissue but much less than the actual heat produced.
I’m Gen X and I’ve been in Information Technology for twenty-eight years. My generation was there at the dawn of personal computing. Yes, there are less technically-savvy people in every generational group, but “older Gen Xers” might consider what you’ve said to be… hmm, what’s the right term? Oh, yes. “Bullshit stereotyping based on age” is the term I’m grasping for here.
I’m well aware of the ELF (Extremely Low-Frequency Radiation) panic. This actually started in the 1970s and rose to national prominence around the late 90s, when it was covered to death by every news outlet. And it was just as silly then as it is now. France is just being France.
And that has little or nothing to do with which generational group you call home.
I bought iPhone 12 when it came out but returned it due to having yellow screen issues which have never been fixed. I bought 11 pro instead as it actually takes better pictures than the 12. I knew something was wrong with that phone 😅
Ever since I saw camera reviews online I crossed the 12 out from my options. The 11 (and 13) pictures were considered better and more color accurate in most blind test reviews.
Title is irresponsible. It produces no ionizing radiation which is what the layman understands by the word radiation.
It produces 1.75 watts per kg over the standard. There is no reason to believe this has any effect whatsoever. it’s not clear that the standard is based on anything meaningful whatsoever
This is literally like if France said, “your flashlight is too bright; it’s causing cancer and must be stopped”. The use of the term, “radiation” in this context is disingenuous because they’re basically saying, “the wifi is too strong”. Technically visible light is the same kind of radiation as microwaves, radiowaves, wifi and x-rays. The reason why x-rays are considered harmful and wifi/microwaves/radio/visible light isn’t is because x-rays are much higher energy than the others, and are able to ionize materials they come into contact with. This can cause cancer. You know what doesn’t cause cancer? Wifi. Unless you’re shitting out enough microwave radiation (also not cancer-causing) to cook an egg, it’s pretty harmless. This is the kinda shit anti-vax Facebook moms get upset about. They hear “radiation” and their knee jerks so hard it shatters their jaw.
I feel like the limit itself COULD be reasonable (there’s more to the potential harms than ionizing radiation /cancer), but popscience news sites are going to make misleading headlines anyways
Can you provide me with articles about that? Afaik the general scientific consensus is that as long as it’s not shoving out >100watts or is releasing EM radiation on an ionizing band (UV and higher), then it’s pretty harmless.
Can you warm up a chicken with wifi? Yeah, but afaik a signal that strong would probably already violate various international treaties regarding radio communications long before it got strong enough to have a noticable affect on the chicken.
Think about how many watts your microwave needs to cook food. That’s the amount of power it takes to heat up food using EM radiation that’s been roughly tuned with the intention of penetrating and heating physical matter by generating friction between water molecules. If I understand the article, the iPhone is putting out less than 6 watts. That’s almost nothing. Should there be a limit? Yeah, but to my knowledge, you’d start accidentally jamming communication frequencies around you long before it became a threat to personal health.
It’s perhaps helpful to realize that the difference between visible light and radio isn’t really that much, they’re both on the EM spectrum. You can generally think about non-ionizing EM radiation like you would light and not be too far off in terms of intuition on danger. How dangerous would you consider a 5W lightbulb? 60W? 100W? 500W? You probably wouldn’t want to press your face up to a 60W bulb, but you wouldn’t worry about having one sitting in your ceiling, or even a couple feet away from you. For reference FCC rules limit wifi access points to under 5W of power in most cases (there’s exceptions for point-to-point radios, but those are VERY uncommon except in some specific commercial settings). Likewise a phone sitting in your pocket, or even held up to your face that’s putting out even 10W while over double the power limit really isn’t anything to worry about.
The current limits for RF devices are VERY conservative, in part due to the massive fear mongering caused by article titles like the above one. The limits are set in such a way that there is absolutely no risk whatsoever, even for devices that massively exceed the limits. In fact I’d argue the limits have far more to do with interference than any actual health concerns. Nobody wants to have to battle their neighbors for wifi signal and a big way to accomplish that is to mandate very low power limits. Many lower power devices are far easier to manage in terms of interference than a few high power devices.
A Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of 5.2 W/kg technically does exceed limits and device manufacturers agree to meet regulations. However, SAR values are not constant and can vary with real-world usage. Phones often operate at lower power levels, reducing actual SAR exposure.
A weak microwave, for theoretical comparison, would likely put out hundreds of Watts per kg.
People are way more likely to get heat damage from the battery than the radio waves from a cellphone
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summaryOn Tuesday, the French watchdog which governs radio frequencies also told the tech giant to fix existing phones. The ANFR has advised Apple that if it cannot resolve the issue via a software update, it must recall every iPhone 12 ever sold in the country. But the World Health Organization has previously sought to allay fears about radiation emitted by mobile phones. Apple told the BBC it was contesting the ANFR’s review, and said it had provided the regulator with lab results from the tech giant itself and third parties which show the device is compliant with all the relevant rules. France’s digital minister Jean-Noel Barrot told French newspaper Le Parisien the decision was due to radiation levels above the acceptable threshold, according to Reuters. It comes as the Chinese foreign ministry issued a rebuttal against media reports which claimed government agencies had told staff to stop using iPhones. — Saved 69% of original text.
I have not heard about SAR in a long time, I’m just glad the days of alleged baseball-sized tumors associated with cell phones and facing the phone towards one’s body are over.
I guess someone got uncomfortably close to him and told him in no uncertain words what would/could happen to him and no amount of €€€ would protect him if he didn’t cut it out
One of Australia’s richest men has sparked a global backlash after saying unemployment should double to remind arrogant workers of their place.
Speaking during a property summit this week, the 41-year-old said the Covid-19 pandemic had changed employees’ attitudes and work ethics for the worse - singling out builders as an example.
He claimed that shift is impacting productivity in the sector, which - combined with tougher regulations - is fuelling Australia’s housing shortage.
Shifting attitudes toward employment are also a matter of widespread discussion on social media, giving rise to hashtags like “quiet quitting”, a term meant to capture the decision to stop going above and beyond for bosses; and “lazy-girl jobs”, which refers to well paying, flexible positions that offer greater work-life balance.
Mr Gurner’s comments, which were shared by the Australian Financial Review (AFR) which hosted the summit, have drawn criticism on social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter), TikTok and LinkedIn.
It sees people on the streets and dependent upon food banks," Mr Wolahan told the AFR.
The original article contains 469 words, the summary contains 170 words. Saved 64%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
bbc.co.uk
Oldest