06-02-10 11:28 PM
52 123
tools
  1. Xpimp's Avatar
    I also say use a BT headset. But I think its all a moot point, there are so many things in our everyday life where there's a claim its harmful for our health.
    03-07-10 01:49 PM
  2. Masahiro's Avatar
    I also say use a BT headset. But I think its all a moot point, there are so many things in our everyday life where there's a claim its harmful for our health.
    Oh don't get me wrong. I don't use it for the SAR reduction. I just really...don't like face grease.
    03-07-10 01:51 PM
  3. WingsFan87's Avatar
    Just an odd thought

    Statistics show that 10 out of 10 people die.. guess the SAR doesn't really then in the end.
    03-07-10 03:59 PM
  4. mojo pin's Avatar
    You people are absolutely ridiculous. They do this SAR testing and post the results FOR A REASON. If none of it even really mattered, WHY would they even bother with it all?! These results obviously mean something, and some of us aren't so ignorant and "indestructable" that we actually pay attention to it. 50 years ago people claimed left and right that cigarettes were pefectly fine and harmless. Cell phones are still a relatively newish product. Who knows what information will be discovered about their effects years from now.

    It's very true that there are loads of potential hazards that we encounter and knowingly put ourselves through daily, but if this guy wants to eliminate one of the possible hazards, what the **** is the harm in that? Leave him alone and let him make his own decisions without being bashed for it. It's his life, not yours, and he can do what he pleases when it comes to his own health.

    And who gives a rat's *** if he wants to use an iphone? Surely the world will not come to an end.

    Now I feel like I need to go punch someone.
    Last edited by mojo pin; 03-07-10 at 06:54 PM.
    03-07-10 06:51 PM
  5. mojo pin's Avatar
    Have you wondered why the SAR level is lower?

    Because the iPhone does not give as good a signal as most other phones, at least that's the opinion from the people I know running iPhones.

    Tom
    Oh by all means! Give me a better phone signal and bring on the brain tumor! A fair trade by all means.
    03-07-10 06:52 PM
  6. stanley696's Avatar
    You people are absolutely ridiculous. They do this SAR testing and post the results FOR A REASON. If none of it even really mattered, WHY would they even bother with it all?! These results obviously mean something, and some of us aren't so ignorant and "indestructable" that we actually pay attention to it. 50 years ago people claimed left and right that cigarettes were pefectly fine and harmless. Cell phones are still a relatively newish product. Who knows what information will be discovered about their effects years from now.

    It's very true that there are loads of potential hazards that we encounter and knowingly put ourselves through daily, but if this guy wants to eliminate one of the possible hazards, what the **** is the harm in that? Leave him alone and let him make his own decisions without being bashed for it. It's his life, not yours, and he can do what he pleases when it comes to his own health.

    And who gives a rat's *** if he wants to use an iphone? Surely the world will not come to an end.

    Now I feel like I need to go punch someone.
    I'm sorry, really don't know how to say this politely...but all that is psychobabble.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-07-10 07:43 PM
  7. iPhoneLoyalist's Avatar
    It sad how people on this site resort to flaming someone once they say they're leaving for the iPhone.
    03-07-10 09:02 PM
  8. stuaw11's Avatar
    It is really sad.

    And who are any of you to tell this person how to live his/her life and what not to expose themselves to?

    You may think its stupid, but thats YOUR life and health to deal with when it goes south. As stated, they wouldnt put out ratings if it didnt matter! SAR is RADIATION at some level after all, and if youre ok with it- great! He/she is not. DEAL WITH IT.

    No one should preach their morals on someone else because they care about something that you dont. This has to be a new low for BB fanboys beyond bashing anyone who leaves for an iphone, telling someone how they should or shouldnt live their life regarding their health.
    Last edited by stuaw11; 03-07-10 at 09:09 PM.
    03-07-10 09:05 PM
  9. GG1's Avatar
    It sad how people on this site resort to flaming someone once they say they're leaving for the iPhone.
    I don't think he is being flamed for wanting an iphone. There's nothing wrong with wanting an iphone. Just no need for excuses. I'm waiting for the next gen iphone, and will make up my mind then. I won't be comparing sar levels.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-07-10 09:34 PM
  10. Masahiro's Avatar
    No one should preach their morals on someone else because they care about something that you dont. This has to be a new low for BB fanboys beyond bashing anyone who leaves for an iphone, telling someone how they should or shouldnt live their life regarding their health.
    Calm down. Morals have little to do with it. The OP posts something, and others disagree or think it's stupid. Who cares. It happens in almost every thread. Do you think you're being some sort of hero, coming to the rescue of the poor, hapless OP or something?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-07-10 09:34 PM
  11. stuaw11's Avatar
    Im not being a hero for anyone but people are being completely asinine to this guy.

    Theres NO excuse for being hostile to someone for a choice based on their own health views.

    No one should tell someone what to do with their own bodies, thats the MOST ridiculous argument in these forums up till now beyond the petty crap.
    03-07-10 09:40 PM
  12. Masahiro's Avatar
    Really though, it's just a forum. People will disagree with you, but that shouldn't be taken as hostility unless you're nave.

    The OP started a discussion about switching to a phone with lower SAR levels. Just because it has to do with your health, doesn't mean it should be considered taboo to disagree with where the OP's coming from, unless it's against the forum rules. Is it?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-07-10 10:05 PM
  13. pkcable's Avatar
    Moving to iphone Forum
    03-07-10 10:17 PM
  14. tedzone's Avatar
    To the guys sticking up for me-- Thank-You.
    To the guys bashing me-- first of all; get a life. And secondly.... Did you even READ what I wrote?

    - I'm in the business-- own a chain of stores
    - Have access to almost any phone since the stock IS after all... MINE
    - am a hardcore bb supporter-- if you can read-- READ my past posts-- I love bb.
    - decided to use the iphone since I enjoyed it on vacation and the low sar level is a bonus.
    - my 9700 is on my desk.... It's pretty safe to assume I'm gonna use it again.

    At what time did I insult any of you or your collective honor?
    At what point did I insult Blackberry?
    At what point did I say the iphone is better.?

    No one, especially me... needs to make up excuses to use a bloody iphone. Oh, unless this is some kind of cult or something and we all have to watch what we say-- I didn't sign up for that.
    They're PHONES people. There's more important stuff. Be pissed if someone hurts you-- Not cause someone says he's gonna use a different phone than you.
    Sheesh.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-07-10 11:14 PM
  15. oasissux's Avatar
    You may think its stupid, but thats YOUR life and health to deal with when it goes south. As stated, they wouldnt put out ratings if it didnt matter! SAR is RADIATION at some level after all, and if youre ok with it- great! He/she is not. DEAL WITH IT.
    That's just plain goofy logic: the ratings exist, therefore there must be a link to SAR and health. Couldn't be a simple marketing ploy for the tin-foil hat wearing public, could it? Here's marketing 101: when you're selling a product, focus on the things your product does 'better' than your competition. Whether it's more environmentally sound, cheaper, stronger, faster, lighter, smaller, bigger, etc. None of this even factors in the complete lack of any bona fide scientific basis to believe that radiation in such miniscule levels has the capacity to cause any sort of cellular tissue damage.
    03-08-10 01:54 AM
  16. harrison0550's Avatar
    Hahahahaha there was almost an app for that!



    Apple has rejected an app that allows users to determine the radio frequency energy emitted by the iPhone on the grounds that the information would "create confusion with iPhone owners from a usability perspective." The Tawkon app was developed by a team of Israeli engineers over 18 months, and figures the amount of energy your head absorbs by estimating the power output of the iPhone's radio.

    Cell phone radiation is the subject of considerable debate, with manufacturers (predictably) on one side, consumer groups on the other, and scientists somewhere in the middle. The World Health Organization has stated, based on the consensus view of scientists studying the issue, that it is unlikely that cancer could be caused by cell phone use. However, some studies have shown an increased risk of a benign tumor of the auditory nerve, and many countries have recommended specific limits on the amount of energy that is safe for your head to absorb. The specific absorption rate (SAR) metric is used to measure of the rate at which energy is absorbed by the body, in watts per kilogram. The US has set a SAR limit of 1.6 W/kg for cell phone use. The iPhone 3GS maxes out at a SAR of 0.79 W/kg, while the older 3G puts out 1.38 W/kg.

    The amount of power the phone's radio puts out at any given moment obviously affects the SAR, and different things will cause the radio to work harder. For example, if you're holding your phone in a way that covers the antenna, the phone will have to boost the radio to compensate. Likewise, if you're deep inside a building as opposed to being out in the open, or if weather conditions limit the radio signal, the cellular base station will instruct the phone to transmit at a higher level. But there's no way to know what power level your phone's radio is using at a particular time, so you might be exposing yourself to more energy than you're expecting.

    This is where Tawkon comes in or came in, before the ban hammer dropped. According to the company website, Tawkon uses your phone's GPS and compass as well as the accelerometer and proximity sensor to determine the distance from cellular towers, the speed you're moving at, the weather, terrain, how close the antennas is from your body, and whether the antenna is vertical or horizontal. It uses all these factors to calculate a prediction of how much energy your body is absorbing at a particular moment.

    In order to monitor your exposure in real time, Tawkon allows you to access your address book from inside the app so you can make a call. It monitors the "radiation levels" with an intuitive green-yellow-red display, and warns you with a vibration and a tone if you get too close to the "red zone." Using the phone's proximity sensor, Tawkon also makes suggestions like recommending a better location, using a headset or changing the iPhones orientation relative to your face.

    Tawkon had been languishing in the approval process for a couple of weeks, the company told TechCrunch's Roi Carthy, and ultimately Apple denied approval on the grounds that the information Tawkon provided would create confusion with iPhone owners from a usability perspective. Use of the term "radiation" is a bit scary: emissions at the frequencies that cell phones use are not ionizing, and are far, far below levels used to create dielectric heating in a microwave oven. However, the idea that the way to prevent "confusion" is to keep users from getting information about their exposure seems specious reasoning at best.

    Tawkon told Carthy that they hope Apple will eventually approve the app, and that they intend to sell it for between $5 and $10 US. They are working on Blackberry and Android versions, so hopefully mere competitive pressures will encourage Apple to do the right thing here.
    03-08-10 02:03 AM
  17. qbnkelt's Avatar
    Well, I had meant to be playful, but might have come across as sarcastic. Fact is, I will be giving the iPhone another try when the 4G comes out because the browser is unparalled.
    My apologies if my teasing didn't come out as playful as I'd meant it.
    03-08-10 07:14 AM
  18. stuaw11's Avatar
    That's just plain goofy logic: the ratings exist, therefore there must be a link to SAR and health. Couldn't be a simple marketing ploy for the tin-foil hat wearing public, could it? Here's marketing 101: when you're selling a product, focus on the things your product does 'better' than your competition. Whether it's more environmentally sound, cheaper, stronger, faster, lighter, smaller, bigger, etc. None of this even factors in the complete lack of any bona fide scientific basis to believe that radiation in such miniscule levels has the capacity to cause any sort of cellular tissue damage.
    No, its goofy logic to say if something isnt proven yet it simply isnt there. Kind of like if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there does it make a sound. You cant prove a negative in this case by saying if unfounded, because its a new technology and no one really knows the answer yet, but that doesnt mean it 100% isnt a health hazard. There is no right answer to the question as of yet, and prob wont be for 10-20 years at least until long term testing can be done on such a relatively new technology.

    This is the same logic that people touted 60-100 years ago with smoking. There was no scientific studies done to prove smoking was bad and could cause cancer, so people of all ages did it, and it was generally considered not to be a health risk. But obviously the lack of data didnt mean it didnt turn out to be a huge health hazard once long term studies were done.

    And i HIGHLY doubt its a marketing tool. Ive NEVER seen an ad touting the SAR rating of a phone. Theyre quantified by the FCC when they test the phones. Ive never once seen a manufacturer use SAR as a pro for their phone vs another; youre confusing the what the media writes with advertising.

    And I NEVER once said there is a 100% link between SAR and cancer because no one truly knows. That's the point, no one really knows yet. But if someone is worried about it, then that's their business to be or not be, considering the lack of long term scientific testing. Again, they wouldnt assign phones a SAR level if it really didnt matter what so ever, they simply wouldnt test for that at all because it wouldnt exist. It is afterall, radiation even at some minute level, that the risks simply lack long term testing needed to make a determination either way.

    Either way, its OP's life to live and if it bothers him then it does. Its no one's business to tell him what to or not to expose himself to where there is no definitive answer either way as to health risks from higher SAR levels.
    Last edited by stuaw11; 03-08-10 at 07:49 AM.
    03-08-10 07:29 AM
  19. oasissux's Avatar
    Radiation is new technology? That's news to me. And probably to scientists.

    Leave the heavy thinking to them.
    03-09-10 12:57 AM
  20. stuaw11's Avatar
    Radiation from cell phones is, considering theyve only been main stream for maybe 10-15 years.

    Different types of radiation out there. Guess thats news to you too

    Again, the smoking anaolgy fits. People KNEW putting things in your lungs was bad and harmful (coal dust for example), but smoking wasnt considered harmful until DECADES of empirical data was collected.

    you cant possibly say something is harmful or not from such a relatively new mainstream product. You cant POSSIBLY put enough data together in 10-15 years, nor have any data for long term risks. Not possible.

    I dont claim to know if they are or are not harmful but theres a VERY real chance they could be down the line from long term use. No one knows! But to ridicule someone from taking a safer approach is ridiculous.
    Last edited by stuaw11; 03-09-10 at 01:12 AM.
    03-09-10 01:08 AM
  21. harrison0550's Avatar
    I smoke I drink and I could really care less. I mean you gotta die from something right? but there apparently are enough people worried about this in the world that there is even a market for cases that redirect the radiation away from your head. If it concerns you get this case if it doesnt then stop on by I'm about to fire one up and have drink.

    03-10-10 08:27 PM
  22. stuaw11's Avatar
    I smoke I drink and I could really care less. I mean you gotta die from something right?
    Hey all good and well, your choice 100%. I know for one I am not going to sit here and lecture you to do that or not to do that.

    I just think its ridiculous people mock OP over one way or the other in an analogous situation of choice of (or not) good health.

    As a smoker myself, Im SURE you know exactly what Im talking about- the obnoxious people who try to tell you what to do- "oh youre going to get cancer" "oh youre going to die" "thats disgusting" etc etc. The ridicule just isnt appreciated with regards to our own health, so I can relate to how OP feels.
    Last edited by stuaw11; 03-10-10 at 09:00 PM.
    03-10-10 08:56 PM
  23. polluxBB2010's Avatar
    Hello there, well, at least ted has a point in terms of the SAR level, it is true that the bold 9700 is among the highest in SAR level in the market. Now the question is, is RIM really doing research on that area as well?, I mean, seriously, because if you look at the trend, try to compare the SAR level with the previous 9000 or even the Curves and Storms, they're lower. Therefore, at least in my case, have me thinking if RIM is also doing research in that, because, even though that SAR radiation is not proven to harm you directly, the other competitors on the mobile phone industry when being measured, they're devices are coming "cleaner" which means they do also care about SAR.
    05-31-10 01:52 AM
  24. tedzone's Avatar
    Pollux...I use my 9700 more often than my 3gs but believe me-- whenever someone's in a talking mood.... I call them back from my office phone. Maybe I'm just paranoid but I could swear I feel the f-ing radiation from the bb. I love it and all but I really wish they'd keep the sar to reasonable levels. Like I said-- the 9700 is 1.55!!!! And the 3gs is 0.24. Call me stupid but I believe that's roughly 600% more for. the 9700.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-31-10 10:43 PM
  25. polluxBB2010's Avatar
    Yeah, It's the same reasoning or dilemma that I kind of have, RIM should be always researching before releasing a phone with such high SAR level, I mean instead of improving from older devices like (Storm and the 9000), they're getting worst in terms of the SAR level, which keeps you wondering. Now, if you use it for long calls, I'd suggest to better make use of an headset or the phone's speaker for that matter.

    I do think, with all do respect of all of the other posting people around, that RIM should better take a look of this regulation as well in terms of the SAR level, nevertheless is not proven to harm, but is the least that we can expect from a big company as RIM, I mean we're not talking about a cloned phones manufacturer here with careless FCC measures (which can be possibly less in SAR level, 1.55 is just too high), this is Research in Motion, and they should really do their Research about this, since its giving bad publicity out of a great device.
    06-02-10 12:51 AM
52 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD