FCC Knew Phones Exceeded Radiation Limits, Hid Info From Public and Courts
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., childrenshealthdefense.org, 24 April 2024
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) knew for years that certain popular smartphones exceeded the agency’s safety limits for human exposure to wireless radiation when held close to the body, according to data obtained by the Environmental Health Trust (EHT) via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
Rather than going public with the testing results, the FCC hid them — even when important lawsuits concerning cellphone radiation’s impact on people’s health were underway.
The outcome of such lawsuits might have been different, had the agency been honest about what it knew, said W. Scott McCollough, lead litigator for Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless cases. McCollough called the FCC’s actions “scandalous.”
Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia, director of CHD’s EMR program, told The Defender:
“While we are not surprised that the FCC is hiding information and prioritizing the protection of big industry over people’s health, seeing the FCC’s actions play out in this way reminds us why the work we are doing in this program is hugely important and why CHD is proud to be on the forefront of holding the FCC and telecom industry accountable through our litigation, education and advocacy.”
Eckenfels-Garcia and McCollough commended the nonprofit scientific research and education group EHT for getting the information out to the public.
“EHT deserves great credit for digging this out,” McCollough told The Defender, “and exposing the FCC’s extraordinary efforts to protect the industry it is supposed to regulate, rather than protecting the people whose health it should be safeguarding, by concealing information people need to know.”
Five phones surpassed FCC radiation limit
According to EHT, the FCC undertook the 2 millimeter (mm) testing on Aug. 30 through Sept. 23, 2019, after an Aug. 21, 2019, Chicago Tribune investigation reported that some cellphones exceeded the FCC’s wireless radiation limits when tested 2 mm from the body.
The FCC typically uses a separation distance of roughly 10mm, or potentially more, for premarketing cellphone testing.
The Chicago Tribune chose 2mm to mimic the real-world experience of those who carry their cellphone in a tight pants pocket or against their skin, EHT said.
The FCC didn’t release its 2 mm testing results until Sept. 29, 2023, in response to EHT’s FOIA requests seeking documents related to cellphone radiation tests performed by the FCC from January 2017 through April 2020.
The FCC’s testing results showed that five of 11 cellphone models it tested exceeded the FCC’s safety limit of 1.6 watts per kilogram (W/kg) when tested at a distance of 2 mm from the body:
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., childrenshealthdefense.org, 24 April 2024
Rather than going public with the testing results, the FCC hid them — even when important lawsuits concerning cellphone radiation’s impact on people’s health were underway.
The outcome of such lawsuits might have been different, had the agency been honest about what it knew, said W. Scott McCollough, lead litigator for Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless cases. McCollough called the FCC’s actions “scandalous.”
Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia, director of CHD’s EMR program, told The Defender:
“While we are not surprised that the FCC is hiding information and prioritizing the protection of big industry over people’s health, seeing the FCC’s actions play out in this way reminds us why the work we are doing in this program is hugely important and why CHD is proud to be on the forefront of holding the FCC and telecom industry accountable through our litigation, education and advocacy.”
Eckenfels-Garcia and McCollough commended the nonprofit scientific research and education group EHT for getting the information out to the public.
“EHT deserves great credit for digging this out,” McCollough told The Defender, “and exposing the FCC’s extraordinary efforts to protect the industry it is supposed to regulate, rather than protecting the people whose health it should be safeguarding, by concealing information people need to know.”
Five phones surpassed FCC radiation limit
According to EHT, the FCC undertook the 2 millimeter (mm) testing on Aug. 30 through Sept. 23, 2019, after an Aug. 21, 2019, Chicago Tribune investigation reported that some cellphones exceeded the FCC’s wireless radiation limits when tested 2 mm from the body.
The FCC typically uses a separation distance of roughly 10mm, or potentially more, for premarketing cellphone testing.
The Chicago Tribune chose 2mm to mimic the real-world experience of those who carry their cellphone in a tight pants pocket or against their skin, EHT said.
The FCC didn’t release its 2 mm testing results until Sept. 29, 2023, in response to EHT’s FOIA requests seeking documents related to cellphone radiation tests performed by the FCC from January 2017 through April 2020.
The FCC’s testing results showed that five of 11 cellphone models it tested exceeded the FCC’s safety limit of 1.6 watts per kilogram (W/kg) when tested at a distance of 2 mm from the body:
- Apple’s iPhone XS, measured at 2.34 W/kg and 1.99 W/kg.
- Samsung’s Galaxy S9, measured at 4.52 W/kg and 4.38 W/kg.
- Samsung’s Galaxy J3, measured at 5.20 W/kg and 5.14 W/kg.
- Motorola’s Moto g6 Play, measured at 1.98 W/kg and 1.98 W/kg.
- BLU’s Vivo 5 Mini, measured at 2.2 W/kg and 2.75 W/kg.
McCollough said he suspected the FCC hid its results because releasing them would have supported the Chicago Tribune’s investigation results.
“The FCC was intent on hiding this information because they knew how bad it would reflect on the commission and the industry it serves.”
“The FCC has abandoned its primary mission, and is now just a servant to telecom industry masters, conspiring against the public’s interest,” McCollough added.
Continue reading:
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/fcc-cellphones-exceeded-wireless-radiation-limits-hidden-public-courts/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.