5 ms·
I'd be skeptical. From what I understand the damaging factor is WiFi here. But when my phone is on WiFi it's usually on the table, at the charging dock and occa
by arihant 11y ago
I'd be skeptical. From what I understand the damaging factor is WiFi here. But when my phone is on WiFi it's usually on the table, at the charging dock and occasionally in my hand.
When the phone is in my pants, it's almost never using WiFi as I'm usually outside and on 3G/LTE.
I'd also look for a sample size significantly north of 100 before waking up someone at FCC.
I'd also point out that it's probably more damaging being closer to router. They noticed these men at a clinic. In public places, people gravitate towards the router offering WiFi much more than they would at their homes or office. So the proximity of router in this study compared to a nominal case is something left unaccounted for.
- Gnarl 11y agoDon't hold your breath for FCC "waking up", no matter the sample size or strength of sci.evidence of hazard. Their Obama-appointed chief used to be #1 CTIA lobbyist. For example: http://microwavenews.com/news-center/cell-phone-carriers-fcc-cozy http://microwavenews.com/news-center/cell-phone-carriers-fcc...