Are Cellphones Safe?

Are Cellphones Safe?

Is Your Cell Phone Safe?

Do you really believe your cell phone is safe to use and has no effect on you?
After all, these things are regulated, right?

Well – Yes and No.

              Yes they are supposedly “regulated” and
NO - Your Cell Phone is Not Safe!

Watch THIS Video with Thaddeus and Heidi

breaking down exactly why the cellphone safety standard is the worst possible way to test the safety of cell phones including:


  • How long ago the SAR was created
  • Ionizing vs non-ionizing radiation
  • The model used to run the test
  • The total time the phone is used for it to pass
  • How close the phone is to the body during the test
  • What the “brain” in the model is made up from

  This seems like it might be boring information.. regulations.. but NO! It's super exciting. Really, I'm not kidding.  

Just understanding how the government asks wireless companies to test safety and what is actually being measured is a conspiracy all in itself. I was fascinated to learn how we test cell phones and go up and watch the video to get the full story. 

How are Cell Phones Regulated?  

Cell phones are regulated by the FCC through a test called the SAR.
Specific Absorption Rate. 

The FCC is the Federal Communications Commission
First of all the FCC is a joke.  More on that later in the course.
It's made up of 5 people only, and they regulate all wireless safety in this country. 

Many of our own government agencies think the cell phone safety standards are a joke.

From an article in The Nation, link in HOMEWORK below

"In 1996, the FCC established cell-phone safety levels based on “specific absorption rate,” or SAR. Phones were required to have a SAR of 1.6 watts or less per kilogram of body weight. In 2013, the American Academy of Pediatrics advised the FCC that its guidelines “do not account for the unique vulnerability and use patterns specific to pregnant women and children.” Nevertheless, the FCC has declined to update its standards."

Also from a homework article
"But political pressures also figure mightily in all this. The EPA, notably, was once a hub of research on RF effects, employing as many as 35 scientists. However, the research program was cut off in the late 80s during the Regan presidency. Blackman says he was personally ―forbidden‖ to study health effects by his ―supervisory structure. He termed it ―a political decision‖ but recognized that if he wanted to continue to work at the EPA he would have to do research in another area."

All cell phones must pass the SAR testing to be considered safe.

What is the SAR? 


The Wireless safety standard is based on a test called the SAR.
SAR stands for Specific Absorption Rate.
This just means how much energy the tissue of a human body absorbs.
Beyond a certain amount of energy hitting our skin, human tissue heats up.
The SAR test measures the temperature change in a model of a brain when a cell phone is turned on near the brain.
Too much of an increase in temperature measured in the fake brain of the SAR test and the cell phone fails the safety standard.
That’s it.
Either the cell phone heats up a model of a brain beyond a certain point or it doesn’t.
This is called the thermal effect of radiation.
If a phone passes the SAR, it is said by the FCC to be safe to sell and safe for us to use.


What’s Wrong with the SAR? 

Here is a photo of the testing equipment required for the SAR

So what’s wrong with this test?

First of all, it assumes that ionizing radiation like X-rays is inherently dangerous while non-ionizing radiation, like the kind from cell phones, is safe unless it heats up body tissue.

Go back up and watch our video

Non-ionizing radiation not only harms human biology through means other than heat, but there really isn’t much difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.


Enter NASA

THIS NASA paper dispels that “myth” of the cell phone companies that ionizing radiation is different from non-ionizing radiation. 

“This is a report of what is known today concerning nonionizing electromagnetic field interactions with the human body. Emphasis here is on non-ionizing radiation in humans, and in that respect the report is probably unique. ... it was generally assumed that others, called NIR (nonionizing radiation), had no effects besides rather obvious ones, which were either avoidable or controllable, such as heating and electric shock. More recently, this assumption has been reconsidered, ....
For example, both theories and observations link nonionizing electromagnetic fields to cancer in humans, in at least three different ways: as a cause, as a means of detection, and as an effective treatment. Other effects are simply curious at this time: audible sounds produced by microwaves;

Man is changing his terrestrial electromagnetic environment. Much of the change is a byproduct of industrial processes (e.g. welding and heating), communication (radio, television, and other forms of broadcasting), and energy transmission (e.g. power lines and the proposed solar power satellite). If he knew the consequences of these changes, he might wish to compensate ...

The second restriction requires a clear distinction between ionizing radiation and NIR (Non-ionizing radiation), and actually there is none. Both forms of radiation are electromagnetic waves, and they seem to differ only in terms of frequency.”

Did you see what NASA said here?

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IONINZING AND NON IONINZING RADIATION according to NASA. The difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation is the whole basis of the cell phone safety standards!

Opps… your cell phone is not safe!
P.S. Join Us Tomorrow when we Tell you Exactly where EMFs come from

Your Homework:
Pick up a copy of THIS Book for a really easy to understand guide on EMFs and more on the SAR

THIS article tells you more about what’s wrong with the SAR test.

THIS article talks about how cell phone companies convinced us they were safe while theyre not.


Back to blog

Leave a comment