Website rates best and worst cellphones by radiation output levels -- how does yours stack up?
You're surely aware that your cellphone bleeds radiation into your face the whole time you're on the phone with your mom, best friend or lover, right? Yes, it's a fact we try not to think about most of the time, but now there's a tool out there on the internets for the more reality-facing folks among us. The Environmental Working Group's launched a website dedicated to rating cellphones on their radiation output alone. Ranking highly (meaning they put out the lowest levels of radiation) are the Motorola RAZR V8, and AT&T's Samsung Impression. In fact, it seems that Samsung is cranking out the healthiest phones these days! Phones with poor showings includes T-Mobile's myTouch 3G and the Blackberry Curve 8830. So hit the read link and tell us, how does your phone rate?
[Via bookofjoe]
[Via bookofjoe]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
dajobo @ Sep 27th 2009 9:32AM
Great. I have the mytouch... Sounds like I'm going to be brain dead in a few short weeks...
Shane @ Sep 27th 2009 10:01AM
E90 FTW.
Roger Alford @ Sep 27th 2009 10:04AM
All this means is that the "bad" phones actually put out more power... more power = better reception. Frankly T-Mobile needs all the reception they can get.
Notice 7 of the "good" phones are on AT&T/CellularONE... we all know they have reception issues.
Notice that most of the "bad" phones are on Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon...We all know they have GREAT reception, save T-Mobile which NEEDS a "bad" phone to get the best reception possible.
So all this means to me, is I should stick with buying phones that radiate more power if I want to actually have the best.
gg555 @ Sep 27th 2009 9:42PM
@Roger Alford: It may be true that the more powerful phones also are phones that get better reception (although my Nokia 6290 scores very low on the radiation scale, but gets better reception than any phone I've ever had), but that doesn't mean the radition isn't frying your brain. Is better reception worth a brain tumor?
@garymiguel: I heard the people who did this analysis on the radio. They explained that the only reason there aren't conclusive studies that show cell phones have adverse health effects is because they haven't been around long enough to have enough people getting tumors and producing good statistical evidence. The effects of the radiation is a slow, cummulative process. But everyone I've heard who's seriously looked into this says it doesn't look good. There's a lot of circumstancial evidence that cell phone radiation is not good for biological matter. And the more time goes on, the more evidence is cropping up that cell phones are harming people. It seems to me, if we don't know for sure, the prudent to do isn't to just dismiss the concern and mindlessly do nothing while you fry your brain. The prudent thing is to take precautions until the matter has been settled one way or the other. Of course in the mean time the cell phone industry has been know to do everything in it's power to undermine and squash any studies on this question.
@Scarhawk: I believe W/kg means how man watts of radiation are absorbed per kilogram of your frying brain.
Steve.G @ Sep 28th 2009 11:19AM
@gg555
I'd take the tumor and a clear call. At least the doctors will understand me when I call to make my chemo appointment. :P
Jim @ Sep 27th 2009 10:30AM
The iPhone is surprisingly missing from the list!?
Brian @ Sep 27th 2009 10:48AM
I have the Impression!!!
Im good(:
Damean @ Sep 27th 2009 11:52AM
So my Magic puts out 3X to 10X more radiation than the Impression. Nice... goodbye, cruel world
Lex @ Sep 27th 2009 11:58AM
I have a BB Bold. ...Sounds like I'm going to be brain dead in a few short weeks...
garymiguel @ Sep 27th 2009 12:11PM
The phrase "healthiest phones" implies that there are known adverse health effects that come from the radatiation output of the other phones. Unless you also link to a study showing that these levels of this type of radation is hazardous, you shouldn't even post this.
Nicole Ting @ Sep 27th 2009 2:50PM
My Bold could be a nuclear bomb and I would still love it the same!
Mitch aka mittu @ Sep 27th 2009 3:36PM
did anyone else notice that in the actual website, they have the palm pre listed for sprint and verizon wireless? has that already been confirmed or just a rumor?
Jouten @ Sep 27th 2009 3:51PM
Nokia didn't have that bad of an outing. As 'healthy' as a Sammy phone may be, I still won't buy another one after being burned by the Eternity.
Douglas @ Sep 27th 2009 5:48PM
This is absolutely ridiculous. All they did was look at the FCC results of each phone and slap a best and worst next to each one.
ace587 @ Sep 27th 2009 6:57PM
BS site
Scarhawk @ Sep 27th 2009 8:06PM
The measurements are in units of Watts per kilogram? Kilogram of what, handset? So a lighter weight handset with the exact same radio gets rated as more dangerous? Doesn't make any sense.
Tj Hooker @ Sep 28th 2009 5:49AM
Watts per kg of body tissue.
Tj Hooker @ Sep 28th 2009 5:52AM
Watts per kg of body tissue, information here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate
egloskerry @ Sep 28th 2009 11:25PM
It's gonna end up being like cigs, where everyone was told there were no ill effects.