iPhone 6 Sar rating discrepencies

Question

Level 1

7 points

iPhone 6 Sar rating discrepencies

I have been considering purchasing an iPhone 6 to replace my now dreadfully slow 4s. But in my research I came across some information that gives pause for concern. When looking at the SAR ratings (specific absorbtion rate) for different cell phones, the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 plus are said to come in at around 1.18 - 1.19 w/kg at the head while other sources list a figure of 1.58 - 1.59 w/kg for the whole body. The legal limit in the U.S. is 1.6 w/kg so both of these figures are higher than I would hope to see. Does anyone have any more information on this besides what you get from a manufacturers website? I've already looked at the Apple website SAR page so please don't direct me to that. Is the 1.59 figure accurate and if so how can they get away with selling a product that is only 0.01 watts per kilogram away from being illegal? And is it also correct that the iPhone 4s has the same SAR rating as the iPhone 6? I have noticed that a lot of this information comes from websites that claim to have RF safety cases and other accessories for cell phones. And one site in particular seems **** bent on promoting Samsung even though they supposedly have no connection to the manufacturer. So is this more FUD than fact or is there real actual cause for concern here? I'm stuck in my decision making because I love the iPhone but I love not having brain cancer more.

iPhone 4s (8GB), iOS 8.3

Posted on Apr 24, 2015 1:33 PM

Reply

Answer 1

deggie

Level 10

167,177 points

Apr 24, 2015 1:49 PM in response to 60D807

I'm not going to refer you there but the numbers on the Apple site are correct. And how are they getting away with anything if they are under the limit? It doesn't say you have to be 20% under, it just says under the limit.

And do you have any idea what that 1.6 limit means and why it is set at 1.6? Neither does anyone else. You'll get more exposure in a year with one flight from NYC to LA than you will from the iPhone.

But it is correct that the Samsung Galaxy phones have a much lower SARS rating (but what does much lower mean?) than any other phone and I tell friends that are really worried about this to buy the Galaxy, but I believe the 6 is creeping up so you may want to look for a Galaxy S5. The HTC's are somewhere in between.

Enjoy your Galaxy.

Reply

Answer 2

60D807 Author

Level 1

7 points

Apr 24, 2015 2:47 PM in response to 60D807

.

Reply

Answer 3

60D807 Author

Level 1

7 points

Apr 24, 2015 2:46 PM in response to deggie

What I mean by getting away with is that if 1.59 is the actual Sar rating absorbed by the whole body and 1.6 is the legal limit, that would be akin to someone driving with .079 BAC when the legal limit is .08. Yes they are legally under the limit but only by the thinnest of margins. And its highly likely if 1.59 is correct that there would be many instances where it would actually go over that number in real world situations.

Reply

Answer 4

deggie

Level 10

167,177 points

Apr 24, 2015 2:58 PM in response to 60D807

No, the SAR ratings are pretty consistent and the way the testing is done it is showing the highest possible level. Yes, it would be akin to that and if someone is at .079 then they are legal. If some one is driving 64.99 in a 65 they are below the speed limit. So what is the issue? There is a line, you can go up to it and you are not exceeding it. Otherwise make the line 1.59.

Enjoy your Galaxy.

Reply

Answer 5

60D807 Author

Level 1

7 points

May 23, 2015 5:28 AM in response to deggie

And is that how you're gonna feel when someone at .79 slams into your car. I mean they were technically legally able to drive.. for the last 5 minutes or however long it took for the cops to show up and administer the test. My point is that there is a line.. And with Apple getting that close to it, you can be sure that in real world scenarios their newest device is going over that line all the time. I seem to recall hearing about a bending issue with the iphone 6 as well. So is it possible that a person with a slightly bent iPhone 6 is unknowingly exposing themselves on a daily basis to radiation that exceeds the federal limits? And if brand new iPhone 6 puts out 1.59, what is it going put out in say 6 months to a year when it is not so new anymore? Maybe having been dropped here and there a couple times and sat on while in your back pocket causing only slight but still noticeable change/damage to the phone. With compromised structural integrity I'd wager that it easily goes above the federal limits.

Reply

Answer 6

May 23, 2015 5:36 AM in response to 60D807

It really doesn't matter what any of us think about the actual limit, the numbers measured or the method used to measure them. The law is a strict limit and Apple met that limit. The only opinion that mattered in determining that was the FCC regulators who were the ones to whom Apple had to submit the data to satisfy the legality of selling the device.

Keep in in mind too that there is no consistent scientific evidence that even this arbitrary limits have any meaning, as no SAR level actually emitted by any device currently or historically has been shown to impose signficiant or serious health risks of any kind. There is no link between any SAR limit from any consumer devices and any health risk of any kind.

Reply

Answer 7

60D807 Author

Level 1

7 points

May 23, 2015 6:12 AM in response to Michael Black

THere may not be much scentific data on the subject as of now but there certainly will be in time. And one thing that seems to be consistently true throughout history is people saying "its safe to do ______" then 20 years pass and "recent findings suggest as some have speculated that doing __________ will actually kill you." We used to allow smoking in airplanes.... Everyone who ever smoked a cigarette in an airplane knew **** good and well they had no business lighting up that stogie while sitting in a metal tube rocketing through the sky alongside cancer patient # 1 (who oddly enough is also smoking) and little baby huey who, for some reason, never would act right. Fast forward to today and in a lot of places, you cant even smoke outside... College campuses. The law is what it is and i think we all can agree that if we had our choice of how much radiation we absorb, we would all go for the smaller numbers. Radiation kills cancer because it kills everything. So in normal every day situations, the less radiation the better.

Reply

Answer 8

May 23, 2015 6:56 AM in response to 60D807

We've already had cell phones for more than 20 years (I got my first, a Sprint qualcomm phone back in 1998 but the first commercial handsets came out in 1983 or 1984). There actually is a ton of data, it's just that very nerarly ALL of it says there is no health risk evident with the emission levels from any past or current device. It's not a lack of scientific evidence, it's that the evidence indicates it simply is not the health risk so many people think it is or want it to be.

the limits set by government standards are basically an arbitrary political compromise to appease those who worry about it, while not imposing ridiculously rigorous standards on manufacturers in light of the fact that none of the many studies to date has shown any cause to be concerned about it.

if it concerns you, then you should shop around and buy the handset with the lowest SAR ratings you can find. Or always use headphones or a hands free device with your phone.

Reply