5 ms·

Worth noting that this is due to the French regulators applying the same SAR absorption standard as the rest of the EU but at a closer distance. Obviously radia

by paulmd 3y ago

Worth noting that this is due to the French regulators applying the same SAR absorption standard as the rest of the EU but at a closer distance. Obviously radiation follows the inverse square law so this means you absorb more radiation in France ;) Even despite this reduced allowable emission the iPhone is barely out of compliance, they will need to reduce power less than 10% or simply get another few millimeters farther away.

cmsj 3y ago
Thanks, I did wonder how, given the pretty strict physics of... physics, they could be claiming that the iPhone is compliant at 5cm and not at 0cm!
mort96 3y ago
Is this true? The article claims that the European (EU?) regulations are 4W/kg at 0mm and 2W/kg at 5mm distance. Is the article incorrect in this? Do you have a reference to the actual SAR regulations?
- paulmd 3y ago
  Sounds like the article is incorrect. The relevant standard for EU-wide regulations is EN 50566:2013, which allows manufacturers to choose the separation with up to 25mm (most vendors standardized on 15mm because this is the maximum separation allowed under the FCC standard). The french disagree with this standard and specify the limits at 0mm and 5mm separation, which obviously increases absorption. However, they did not increase the absorption limits accordingly. Thus, actually most phones are out of compliance with the new french regulations (ANFR describes it as "a large proportion of phones" as being out of compliance, sounds like de-facto it's almost all). Since the EU is more of an advisory body and allows individual countries to set such limits individually, the EU has issued an application restriction which prohibits their usage in France (presumably until manufacturers patch TX power limits downwards as Apple will most likely do). I guess you can describe that as an "EU limit" since it's an application restriction approved by the EU, but it's not the same limit as applies in the rest of the EU, it's a local application restriction issued at the request of french regulatory bodies applicable only in france. https://www.anses.fr/en/content/exposure-mobile-telephones-carried-close-body https://www.anses.fr/en/content/exposure-mobile-telephones-c... https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/ANFR-Data-PDF-SAR-European-and-FCC-.pdf https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/ANFR-Data-PDF-SAR-Eur... https://www.anfr.fr/en/anfr/news/all-news/detail-of-the-news/exposure-to-electromagnetic-fields-anfr-strengthens-the-monitoring-of-exposure-to-the-electromagnetic-fields-emitted-by-mobile-phones-and-tablets-sar https://www.anfr.fr/en/anfr/news/all-news/detail-of-the-news... I can get behind removing the ambiguity of manufacturer-chosen testing distances and officially specifying this at 15mm. Or if you think that's unrealistic then 5mm and 0mm also make sense, but if you move the emitter closer you're gonna get a stronger signal and the SAR threshold should be adjusted accordingly. Which the french didn't do, because they're low-key catering to the "phones cause cancer" wackos here for political play. But this isn't just an apple thing and there will be a patch reducing your signal strength for android too, most likely. iphones just get lots of media play.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Shouldn't it be at zero? Considering that's how the vast majority of people hold their cell phones pressed against the ear.
    - mensetmanusman 3y ago
      The phone has a finite thickness.
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        Yes but modern iPhone designs uses the metal casing as antennas. Did you not realize that?
        paulmd 3y ago
        "optical center" of the antenna probably is at least 5mm even with a phone pressed against your head, given the distance the ends are away. and things like clothing or purses add interposing distance too. again though it's all a matter of how you design the test. if the source comes closer, the output is going to go up. using the same number but way closer than everyone else is actually using a lower number than everyone else. again, I'm OOP and (while I'm not a doctor) my take is that the scale of cellphone ownership is far too big (at 4x+ these french emission limits, per the ANFR charts) for these to be reasonable decisions. cellphones at the customary frequency bands and emissions levels just are not that much of a health hazard, or else there would have been observable results bounded by the sample size (large). And really there are practical technical limits to how much power it's worth pounding out before you overwhelm the cell site or drain your battery in an hour. It's optimal for everyone if noise floors are low.
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        > "optical center" of the antenna probably is at least 5mm even with a phone pressed against your head, given the distance the ends are away. and things like clothing or purses add interposing distance too. Can you link a source?
lagrange77 3y ago
I thought this whole EM radiation fear was bogus. How does it even interact with the body? There are obviously no neutrons flying around..
- sangnoir 3y ago
  What's the link between EM emissions and neutrons?
  - lagrange77 3y ago
    To my understanding there is no link.
    - lxgr 3y ago
      Once again, it all depends on the frequency! Gamma radiation is EM radiation and can cause nuclear fission [1], which in turn can release neutron radiation. I'm fairly certain that no iPhone model to date emits gamma radiation, though. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photofission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photofission
      - lagrange77 3y ago
        Interesting, thanks!
  - mort96 3y ago
    My guess is that "There are no neutrons flying around" is a flippant way to say it's not ionizing radiation, since the common ionizing radiation is made up of alpha particles, beta particles (electrons), neutrons or very high frequency photons. Imagine it says "It's not like there are high speed neutrons flying around".
- ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
  Wasn't the point of 2.4 GHz being unregulated because it's used by microwave ovens (citation needed). It interacts strongly with water atleast

by paulmd 3y ago

cmsj 3y ago

Thanks, I did wonder how, given the pretty strict physics of... physics, they could be claiming that the iPhone is compliant at 5cm and not at 0cm!

mort96 3y ago

Is this true? The article claims that the European (EU?) regulations are 4W/kg at 0mm and 2W/kg at 5mm distance. Is the article incorrect in this? Do you have a reference to the actual SAR regulations?

paulmd 3y ago
Sounds like the article is incorrect. The relevant standard for EU-wide regulations is EN 50566:2013, which allows manufacturers to choose the separation with up to 25mm (most vendors standardized on 15mm because this is the maximum separation allowed under the FCC standard). The french disagree with this standard and specify the limits at 0mm and 5mm separation, which obviously increases absorption. However, they did not increase the absorption limits accordingly. Thus, actually most phones are out of compliance with the new french regulations (ANFR describes it as "a large proportion of phones" as being out of compliance, sounds like de-facto it's almost all). Since the EU is more of an advisory body and allows individual countries to set such limits individually, the EU has issued an application restriction which prohibits their usage in France (presumably until manufacturers patch TX power limits downwards as Apple will most likely do). I guess you can describe that as an "EU limit" since it's an application restriction approved by the EU, but it's not the same limit as applies in the rest of the EU, it's a local application restriction issued at the request of french regulatory bodies applicable only in france. https://www.anses.fr/en/content/exposure-mobile-telephones-carried-close-body https://www.anses.fr/en/content/exposure-mobile-telephones-c... https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/ANFR-Data-PDF-SAR-European-and-FCC-.pdf https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/ANFR-Data-PDF-SAR-Eur... https://www.anfr.fr/en/anfr/news/all-news/detail-of-the-news/exposure-to-electromagnetic-fields-anfr-strengthens-the-monitoring-of-exposure-to-the-electromagnetic-fields-emitted-by-mobile-phones-and-tablets-sar https://www.anfr.fr/en/anfr/news/all-news/detail-of-the-news... I can get behind removing the ambiguity of manufacturer-chosen testing distances and officially specifying this at 15mm. Or if you think that's unrealistic then 5mm and 0mm also make sense, but if you move the emitter closer you're gonna get a stronger signal and the SAR threshold should be adjusted accordingly. Which the french didn't do, because they're low-key catering to the "phones cause cancer" wackos here for political play. But this isn't just an apple thing and there will be a patch reducing your signal strength for android too, most likely. iphones just get lots of media play.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Shouldn't it be at zero? Considering that's how the vast majority of people hold their cell phones pressed against the ear.
  - mensetmanusman 3y ago
    The phone has a finite thickness.
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      Yes but modern iPhone designs uses the metal casing as antennas. Did you not realize that?
      - paulmd 3y ago
        "optical center" of the antenna probably is at least 5mm even with a phone pressed against your head, given the distance the ends are away. and things like clothing or purses add interposing distance too. again though it's all a matter of how you design the test. if the source comes closer, the output is going to go up. using the same number but way closer than everyone else is actually using a lower number than everyone else. again, I'm OOP and (while I'm not a doctor) my take is that the scale of cellphone ownership is far too big (at 4x+ these french emission limits, per the ANFR charts) for these to be reasonable decisions. cellphones at the customary frequency bands and emissions levels just are not that much of a health hazard, or else there would have been observable results bounded by the sample size (large). And really there are practical technical limits to how much power it's worth pounding out before you overwhelm the cell site or drain your battery in an hour. It's optimal for everyone if noise floors are low.
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        > "optical center" of the antenna probably is at least 5mm even with a phone pressed against your head, given the distance the ends are away. and things like clothing or purses add interposing distance too. Can you link a source?

lagrange77 3y ago

I thought this whole EM radiation fear was bogus. How does it even interact with the body? There are obviously no neutrons flying around..

sangnoir 3y ago
What's the link between EM emissions and neutrons?
- lagrange77 3y ago
  To my understanding there is no link.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    Once again, it all depends on the frequency! Gamma radiation is EM radiation and can cause nuclear fission [1], which in turn can release neutron radiation. I'm fairly certain that no iPhone model to date emits gamma radiation, though. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photofission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photofission
    - lagrange77 3y ago
      Interesting, thanks!
- mort96 3y ago
  My guess is that "There are no neutrons flying around" is a flippant way to say it's not ionizing radiation, since the common ionizing radiation is made up of alpha particles, beta particles (electrons), neutrons or very high frequency photons. Imagine it says "It's not like there are high speed neutrons flying around".
ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
Wasn't the point of 2.4 GHz being unregulated because it's used by microwave ovens (citation needed). It interacts strongly with water atleast