1. Ment's Avatar
    What does a paratek antenna have to do with where you store your phone?

    As far as your first sentence, you seem to be answering some question that wasn't asked. Perhaps you could also clarify that sentence as well.
    The design of the Z10/Z30 including the Paratek antenna leads to high SAR ratings which is a problem those believe cell signals are bad for your health so it would make sense to avoid them. It also makes sense that the reason there is not a large cancer cluster attributed to holding your phone in pants/shirt pockets vs a bra is not that fabric material is attenuating the signals but that the concept is bunk in the first place. Otherwise just buy a case and put it in your bra and be happy with the world.
    Last edited by Ment; 08-27-14 at 09:19 AM. Reason: spelling
    MarsupilamiX likes this.
    08-27-14 09:13 AM
  2. blackmoe's Avatar
    To say nothing of random dialing while at the gym. Really annoying.
    Safe to say then that "talk to the hand" doesn't apply here
    08-27-14 09:18 AM
  3. Alain_A's Avatar
    before the cell phone became so popular to everyone in this world there was the cordless home phone that started to become popular and I remember that one story that one florida woman was on the phone for like 10 hrs a day holding the phone to her right ear and had developed brain cancer in that area..So at the time the medical people was wondering and talking about the cordless phone might have been involve.....the woman was not young 30 to 40 years old.....that was like over 20 years ago
    08-27-14 09:28 AM
  4. anon(3732391)'s Avatar
    Let's just pretend, for a moment, that the device wouldn't do any harm.

    Now picture that!!!
    08-27-14 09:42 AM
  5. redlightblinking's Avatar
    The design of the Z10/Z30 including the Paratek antenna leads to high SAR ratings which is a problem those believe cell signals are bad for your health so it would make sense to avoid them.
    Not necessarily. It would depend on how you use your phone or store it when not in use. But what does that have to do with putting your phone next to the sensitive tissues of your breasts? I don't believe the OP ever mentioned just using a BB in this regard, but any phone in general.

    It also makes sense that the reason there is not a large cancer cluster attributed to holding your phone in pants/shirt pockets vs a bra is not that fabric material is attenuating the signals but that the concept is bunk in the first place.

    Regardless of the attenuation, the different locations of storage potentially have difference sensitivities to the radiation. Sure, you could use a case on a phone in your bra, or have it beyond clothing in your pocket, but the surrounding body parts may react differently regardless of the attenuation.


    Otherwise just buy a case and put it in your bra and be happy with the world.
    There is no evidence that just putting it in a case makes it with safe ranges when stored in your bra.
    08-27-14 09:43 AM
  6. Ment's Avatar
    Not necessarily. It would depend on how you use your phone or store it when not in use. But what does that have to do with putting your phone next to the sensitive tissues of your breasts? I don't believe the OP ever mentioned just using a BB in this regard, but any phone in general.




    Regardless of the attenuation, the different locations of storage potentially have difference sensitivities to the radiation. Sure, you could use a case on a phone in your bra, or have it beyond clothing in your pocket, but the surrounding body parts may react differently regardless of the attenuation.




    There is no evidence that just putting it in a case makes it with safe ranges when stored in your bra.
    If you believe cell phone radiation is bad for your health than having phones with larger levels stands to reason is worse given what we know about environment factors to cancers. The BB vs Sammy was for the previous discussion with OP regarding risk mitigation and objective risk assessment.

    Agree that having a case does little or nothing because cases and fabric are not barriers to signals. Don't know why you posed fabric as a possible factor given this.
    MarsupilamiX likes this.
    08-27-14 09:52 AM
  7. anon(5906760)'s Avatar
    Yes, phones give off radiation and yes, you should not have then up against you for long periods of time.

    Now, should we go all bat sh*t crazy? No. It has been, what?, like 15 years since the first cellphone was out? 10ish since the first smartphone (BlackBerry ). If there is no unanimous agreement that smartphones are the cause, then I don't think this is reason to panic.

    I've had this topic come up in conversations several times and I've seen the usual Facebook posts about it.

    So back to my point: you're not going to develop a deadly disease from going to a party or something and putting your phone in your bra for 5-6 hours.

    What OP is saying is long exposure, I'm assuming no one sleeps with their phone strapped to them? I'm assuming most ladies have a purse that they carry with them most places? If you do it once in a while it won't kill you. Just don't leave it there for days because it isn't great for you. Same with the Bluetooth headsets and the wireless headphones. If you're not using the headset, take it off and put it down until you need it.

    Now, as an aside: I always have my phone in my right pocket. (always the right) and over the past 6 years I haven't had any problems whatsoever. So take everything with a grain of salt as well.

    That's all folks.

    Posted via CB10
    anon(3732391) likes this.
    08-27-14 09:53 AM
  8. anon(3732391)'s Avatar
    Yes, phones give off radiation and yes, you should not have then up against you for long periods of time.

    Now, should we go all bat sh*t crazy? No. It has been, what?, like 15 years since the first cellphone was out? 10ish since the first smartphone (BlackBerry ). If there is no unanimous agreement that smartphones are the cause, then I don't think this is reason to panic.

    I've had this topic come up in conversations several times and I've seen the usual Facebook posts about it.

    So back to my point: you're not going to develop a deadly disease from going to a party or something and putting your phone in your bra for 5-6 hours.

    What OP is saying is long exposure, I'm assuming no one sleeps with their phone strapped to them? I'm assuming most ladies have a purse that they carry with them most places? If you do it once in a while it won't kill you. Just don't leave it there for days because it isn't great for you. Same with the Bluetooth headsets and the wireless headphones. If you're not using the headset, take it off and put it down until you need it.

    Now, as an aside: I always have my phone in my right pocket. (always the right) and over the past 6 years I haven't had any problems whatsoever. So take everything with a grain of salt as well.

    That's all folks.

    Posted via CB10


    Sooooo.... You've always walked with a limp???



    (just kidding, my friend!!)
    anon(5906760) and Ragbert like this.
    08-27-14 10:01 AM
  9. Jiggy1971's Avatar
    Protect the boobies!!
    08-27-14 10:06 AM
  10. tickerguy's Avatar
    There is no solid scientific evidence that non-ionizing radiation (RF energy) causes cancer.

    RF does cause heating, and in extreme cases can cause burns. RF burns are nasty because they are not from a surface and thus don't proceed from the outside of the skin inward; they are instead through the tissue. If you've ever had an RF burn you won't forget it (I have, and it wasn't fun); they take a long time to heal. But the power levels involved in a handheld cellphone pretty-much preclude that possibility.

    There are a number of people who have asserted over the years via what are called "observational studies" that cellphone use is potentially cancer-causing. The problem with observational studies is that they are incapable of showing anything other than correlation. That is, causation, which is the issue, cannot be demonstrated by them.

    Attempts to demonstrate causation in animal studies (it would be highly unethical to do them on humans!) have repeatedly failed to do so.

    If you remember there was a great deal of hue and cry about dietary saturated fat (that is, from animal flesh) causing high cholesterol, heart disease and obesity. That too came from observational studies. Unfortunately the lipid hypothesis which was allegedly demonstrated by these studies has now been shown to be nonsense. In the intervening 30+ years, however, people in the United States (and elsewhere) have been goaded into avoiding saturated fats while substituting carbohydrate and engineered plant-based fats for it; the result has been explosion of the very diseases, specifically heart disease, diabetes and obesity, that the avoidance of saturated fats was supposed to prevent!

    Be careful with buying into the hype machine that a whole lot of people care to promote.
    TGR1, JeepBB and 00stryder like this.
    08-27-14 10:07 AM
  11. anon(5906760)'s Avatar
    Sooooo.... You've always walked with a limp???



    (just kidding, my friend!!)
    Only after a night out drinking! Lmao!

    Posted via CB10
    anon(3732391) likes this.
    08-27-14 10:34 AM
  12. thatplaybookguy's Avatar
    I keep mine in my tighty whities.
    anon(5906760) likes this.
    08-27-14 10:37 AM
  13. MB64's Avatar
    I use mines while standing next to the microwave heating my food.

    Posted via CB10 with my z30
    TGR1 and anon(3732391) like this.
    08-27-14 10:43 AM
  14. Completing's Avatar
    Use holster? How is this going to protect you from the weak radiation emitted by your phone?
    08-27-14 10:49 AM
  15. Dr J39's Avatar
    "Even Dr. OZ has voiced concerns ."
    Dr. Oz may be a competent heart surgeon, but beyond that, he is a "snake oil" salesman. I would never use him as my authority. Having said that: I still do not believe that carrying a phone, in your bra, is a good idea. I would not want my three daughters to do it. Besides, it just looks tacky.
    08-27-14 11:20 AM
  16. Dr J39's Avatar
    I guess people should not be laughing at those who wear pants around their knees.

    Posted via CB10
    Yes they should!
    08-27-14 11:48 AM
  17. Ayla Pnx's Avatar
    I guess you aren't old enough to remember the Motorola Brick :-). Phones got smaller, now they are growing again. Nothing stays the same. Sorry, off topic.

    Posted via my Q10 or Z10
    I remember there were Motorola roll on, there quite small... with them green screen

    Posted via CB10
    08-27-14 12:31 PM
  18. redlightblinking's Avatar

    Agree that having a case does little or nothing because cases and fabric are not barriers to signals. Don't know why you posed fabric as a possible factor given this.
    All materials are barriers for signals no matter how minor. Otherwise you'd get a signal inside a bunker. I posed fabric as a possible factor simply as a comparison to having NO fabric (placed against skin in bra).
    08-27-14 12:39 PM
  19. redlightblinking's Avatar
    Use holster? How is this going to protect you from the weak radiation emitted by your phone?
    Wear sunscreen? How is this going to protect you from the radiation emitted by the sun?

    Same answer for both questions.....

    Because it may act as just enough diffusion that the cumulative effect is less on the body, Either way, you're receiving radiation, but with the holster / sunscreen you're just getting less of it.
    08-27-14 12:42 PM
  20. redlightblinking's Avatar
    There is no solid scientific evidence that non-ionizing radiation (RF energy) causes cancer.

    RF does cause heating, and in extreme cases can cause burns. RF burns are nasty because they are not from a surface and thus don't proceed from the outside of the skin inward; they are instead through the tissue. If you've ever had an RF burn you won't forget it (I have, and it wasn't fun); they take a long time to heal. But the power levels involved in a handheld cellphone pretty-much preclude that possibility.

    There are a number of people who have asserted over the years via what are called "observational studies" that cellphone use is potentially cancer-causing. The problem with observational studies is that they are incapable of showing anything other than correlation. That is, causation, which is the issue, cannot be demonstrated by them.

    Attempts to demonstrate causation in animal studies (it would be highly unethical to do them on humans!) have repeatedly failed to do so.

    If you remember there was a great deal of hue and cry about dietary saturated fat (that is, from animal flesh) causing high cholesterol, heart disease and obesity. That too came from observational studies. Unfortunately the lipid hypothesis which was allegedly demonstrated by these studies has now been shown to be nonsense. In the intervening 30+ years, however, people in the United States (and elsewhere) have been goaded into avoiding saturated fats while substituting carbohydrate and engineered plant-based fats for it; the result has been explosion of the very diseases, specifically heart disease, diabetes and obesity, that the avoidance of saturated fats was supposed to prevent!

    Be careful with buying into the hype machine that a whole lot of people care to promote.
    While everything you've said is basically correct and I agree with, it doesn't really prove that there is no effect either. It simply shows that we can't yet prove a correlation. While some may need to beware of hype machines, it's not a bad idea to beware of unproven possibilities either. To each, his own.
    08-27-14 12:47 PM
  21. bambinoitaliano's Avatar
    Cancer cells manifestation no longer limited to those who has the family history. There are a lot of non hereditary cases all over the world. We all have the cancer cells in us, we just don't know why it manifest in some and not others. It's certainly possible that the microwave could cause cancer cells to manifest in someone but we do not know who or how. OP is just throwing the precaution, hoping to reduce one element that might cause someone infected with cancer.





    Posted via CB10
    08-27-14 12:55 PM
  22. Ment's Avatar
    All materials are barriers for signals no matter how minor. Otherwise you'd get a signal inside a bunker. I posed fabric as a possible factor simply as a comparison to having NO fabric (placed against skin in bra).
    By mentioning it you are listing it as significant and it isn't otherwise a case would be even better in terms of the very small differences. Its certainly doesn't rate mentioning as a factor on whether cancers are present in a breast with skin contact to the outer phone casing vs a pocket with thin material between the chest wall, thigh/hip or rear end.

    And you can't use ultraviolet wavelengths as a guide either. Its not the same as the cell RF spectrum and the attenuation coefficient is not the same.
    08-27-14 01:32 PM
  23. redlightblinking's Avatar
    By mentioning it you are listing it as significant and it isn't otherwise a case would be even better in terms of the very small differences.
    Sure a case would also be a factor. Not sure what point you are arguing here.

    Its certainly doesn't rate mentioning as a factor on whether cancers are present in a breast with skin contact to the outer phone casing vs a pocket with thin material between the chest wall, thigh/hip or rear end.
    I actually didn't do that, but thanks for letting me know what doesn't rate mentioning. I'll add that to my journal.

    And you can't use ultraviolet wavelengths as a guide either. Its not the same as the cell RF spectrum and the attenuation coefficient is not the same.
    Uh, what? When did I use Ultraviolet wavelenths "as a guide"?

    But, the very fact that you just said that both have attenuation coefficients seems to be your admission that both can be attenuated. Thanks for confirming my theory.
    08-27-14 02:10 PM
  24. Ment's Avatar
    [QUOTE=redlightblinking;10768416]
    I actually didn't do that, but thanks for letting me know what doesn't rate mentioning. I'll add that to my journal.
    Many have brought up the pants pocket or shirt pocket issue. Perhaps the reason that is less dangerous is simply because the clothing itself acts as a small amount of diffusion that can absorb or scatter the waves slightly
    yes please add it but only in a insignificant place.


    Uh, what? When did I use Ultraviolet wavelenths "as a guide"?
    Because it may act as just enough diffusion that the cumulative effect is less on the body, Either way, you're receiving radiation, but with the holster / sunscreen you're just getting less of it.
    You list them having similar effects without mentioning scale which is plain wrong. Like saying beware of hurricanes and also rain showers.

    Variables such as phone model, distance from towers, weather and location have more to do with the amount of cell RF exposure to skin than clothing, holster or whatever small issues you care to list.
    08-27-14 03:19 PM
  25. FSeverino's Avatar
    I keep hearing differing opinions... but what I say is that half an inch isn't that much, with my case and clothes that's already over that amount. I also have my phone out of my pocket as often as possible.

    The way I look at it I would rather be safe. It's not like you need to have it touching your skin to work, so why not keep it slightly away. If anything it helps you use it less and enjoy the world around you.

    Posted via CB10
    08-27-14 03:29 PM
179 ... 23456 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Promote your BBM Channel
    By Intrestor in forum General BBM Chat
    Replies: 460
    Last Post: 02-16-20, 01:52 AM
  2. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 09-25-15, 05:06 PM
  3. Why do phone store reps advise against BlackBerry?
    By skstrials in forum General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 11-05-14, 06:42 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-26-14, 03:58 PM
  5. How to use proxy server in BB10?
    By sargodian2 in forum More for your BlackBerry 10 Phone!
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-26-14, 10:50 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD