Dangers of using rep mobile phones

[Chronus]

I think this deserves a topic of it's own as it is bigger than the topic of one branded rep phone (which Dani is referring to).

These quotes are from that thread and include information on the dangers of using rep phones as well as genuine mobile phones in cars.

are non scared of the output this phones gives?health is the most important you have in life.

Well as someone who's seen far too many idiopathic tumours of the head and neck in my time, I'd say it's something everyone should be seriously concerned about.

It's the same issue with using a mobile inside a vehicle, the Faraday cage effect - it may or may not be harmful but we simply do not have access to any real long-term data. And that's with genuine phones, manufactured to the highest standard of safety compliance currently in place. Why add further risk by buying a cheap rep version?

The other concern of course, surrounding rep electronics in general, even with swapping out for genuine battery or not, is the fire risk. Would you leave it plugged in and charging in your home overnight, or whilst you're out for a few hours? Not me gents.

Some info on the Faraday cage effect when using a mobile phone in the car. It's pretty obvious really isn't it?

http://www.rfsafe.com/research/rf_radiatio...y_cage_cars.htm

[Chronus]

PS. this is not a shot at anyone (especially sql_pl as he is not making any profit!) but more for informative reasons.

I had never thought about the Faraday cage effect when using mobile phones, but it's pretty much common sense, I should have realised earlier!

[Nanuq]

Not to overstate the obvious here, but if a very weak (in comparison) signal can penetrate your car's "cage" then who's to worry about a much stronger signal getting trapped inside?

If the cage was tuned to resonate with your frequency, then... yeah. But I'm not holding my breath.

PS: this dismissal of potential risk does not apply to those driving a Pontiac Tempest ;-)

[Pugwash]

I had never thought about the Faraday cage effect when using mobile phones, but it's pretty much common sense, I should have realised earlier!

If the Faraday cage effect were that significant, the signal wouldn't get in the car. QED.

Edit: Oh, go on. I'll make it easier for you. Google skin effect.

[Nanuq]

C'mon Pugs, you gotta appreciate my mention of the Pontiac.

[Pugwash]

C'mon Pugs, you gotta appreciate my mention of the Pontiac.

Here's the science lesson for dummies condensed into a paragraph:

If a Faraday Cage is in effect, 100% of the signal is blocked. It's an on/off deal. If you get a signal, the Faraday Cage doesn't work at that frequency. If you don't get a signal, it's working. Lightning will strike the outside of a car, plane or train and leave the passengers intact, yet the gaps (windows) in the metal frames allow really high frequencies in.

Come on, how on earth can GPS work on an iPhone in a car if you're sat in a Faraday Cage? Think about it.

If you're going to use science to explain something, at least have a basic understanding before you post something controversial and scary.

ps. The link that proposed the horror story, was it by any chance selling something? That should be a give-away to at least check google/wikipedia before telling us we're cooking ourselves.

[docblackrock]

Since Chronus has quoted me here, or rather *ahem* misquoted me, let me make my view clear.

I said that the use of mobile phones in general was worthy of caution, as we are not in a position to look at hardcore retrospective data on long-term health. I then used the example of the 'Faraday cage effect in cars' theory as an example of a valid argument that there's little consensus on, but that warrants caution and concern.......especially when driving big ugly American gas-guzzlers with penis-size-compensatory masculine names, such as the Pontiac Tempest

As with all these things, we simply do not know. All we do know is that levels of unexplained malignancies of the head and neck seem to be on the rise in modern times (greater exposure to more and stronger electromagnetic fields?), although it could be equally argued that's more to do with our improved ability to detect such lesions.

Now I'm not particularly risk-averse myself, far from it, but my point is I, personally, would rather not add to my own baseline risk factors by using equipment that was not manufactured to a standard of safety compliance that mirrored current knowledge on short-term morbidity.

That is all. Good night. Sweet dreams.

[Guest avitt]

A few thoughts:

1. As Pugwash points out, the car doesn't keep all of the RF energy inside (or else your phone wouldn't work).

2. The referenced site was obviously trying to sell antennas. This is pretty funny because, with very few exceptions, most of today's phones don't provide RF ports for antennas. (To get the RF outside of the car, you would need to use an antenna port which disconnects the phone's internal antenna...otherwise, it will still be transmitting inside the car)

3. The maximum output power of a mobile is 0.6 Watt. The RF energy is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. There's a lot of empirical evidence that long term exposure to EMFs can cause health risks, so it makes sense to keep the phone away from your body when it's transmitting.

4. If you use a bluetooth headset (which is itself an RF transceiver), with the phone in your pocket, you have to ask yourself "would I rather fry my mellon, or my 'nads?"... Your choice.

5. Inside a car, you probably have more to worry about from the emf emitted by the blower motors of your AC system, which are constantly radiating you at low levels.

6. If you're really concerned, I suggest using a CDMA phone instead of a GSM one. CDMA is designed to operate at the lowest possible signal levels (it constantly monitors the RF conditions and call quality, to ensure that the minimum power is used). Also, GSM puts out a lot of spurious RF noise, due to discontinuous transmission (the step function of the amplifier being turned on/off).

[Chronus]

Sorry all, I was at work and tired, and should have highlighted the "lack of data" part in docblackrock's quote (and probably not posted the first link i found!).

It was more a general thing about the danger of rep mobile phones, with no proper QC or standards, and the rush to cut costs to produce the most superficially accurate phone, who knows what it could be emitting.

[Nanuq]

All's well that ends well... except I apparently have to get rid of my car with its penis-size-compensatory masculine name. Drat. So what's next? A Hummer? That sort of reminds me of a little birdy.

Chronus does make a valid point: this is the same as fake sunglasses... they may look the same but they don't filter out UV as well as the gen, and your retinas get fried because they are dilated, yet not protected. A phone might look the same as gen, but who knows (or can measure) what it is emitting?

I vote for spending the extra money and getting the real deal when it's something like this. Never EVER scrimp on life saving/preserving gear.

[Corgi]

Here's the problem with replica mobile phones for me. If something happens (knock on wood) that I need to call emergency services, I want to be sure that my phone will be in working condition. I have an intimate familiarity with counterfeit watches and I know that build quality is not a top priority at the rep factories.

We are talking about a device that could be used to save your life, or the life of a loved one. I don't play games when it comes to these sorts of things.

[Chronus]

Chronus does make a valid point: this is the same as fake sunglasses... they may look the same but they don't filter out UV as well as the gen, and your retinas get fried because they are dilated, yet not protected. A phone might look the same as gen, but who knows (or can measure) what it is emitting?

I vote for spending the extra money and getting the real deal when it's something like this. Never EVER scrimp on life saving/preserving gear.

That's the main point Dani and DocBlackRock were making as well...

And also that working late and drinking Red Bull does not help you concentrate... like right now, I am writing on here instead of sorting out this mess at work! Everybody else has gone home a couple hours ago...

[Pugwash]

That's the main point Dani and DocBlackRock were making as well...

Well, that's not something I disagree with.

The whole Faraday Cage distraction should have been avoided if your point was that black market mobiles don't have safety as a priority.

[Nanuq]

My God, Pugs... have you forgotten that many of us are Americans?

STYLE OVER SUBSTANCE!!!!!!!

[Dani]

Great thread Chronus

I do understand why some would like to use 300$ insted of 1400$ on the arte nokia but i think a man's or girls health is way more important then 1100$,phones are proven to be dangerous in some way we just don't now exactly have yet, but i think we all have an idea on that..As docblackrock said why ad the risk and use a copy phone that never has had a output test?

Cheers

[Johnkaz]

A different angle on the same subject. I bought a multi phone car charger from ebay for about

[JohnG]

Here's the problem with replica mobile phones for me. If something happens (knock on wood) that I need to call emergency services, I want to be sure that my phone will be in working condition. I have an intimate familiarity with counterfeit watches and I know that build quality is not a top priority at the rep factories.

We are talking about a device that could be used to save your life, or the life of a loved one. I don't play games when it comes to these sorts of things.

By that argument, not having a cell phone at all would be irresponsible.

[cib0rgman]

All's well that ends well... except I apparently have to get rid of my car with its penis-size-compensatory masculine name. Drat. So what's next? A Hummer? That sort of reminds me of a little birdy.

Chronus does make a valid point: this is the same as fake sunglasses... they may look the same but they don't filter out UV as well as the gen, and your retinas get fried because they are dilated, yet not protected. A phone might look the same as gen, but who knows (or can measure) what it is emitting?

I vote for spending the extra money and getting the real deal when it's something like this. Never EVER scrimp on life saving/preserving gear.

Does that really happen to the retinas. I am not expert but then it should be a lot of blind people?

[Corgi]

By that argument, not having a cell phone at all would be irresponsible.

To me it is, yes.

[fakemaster]

Rep or gen they emit radiation. And heving one is not an issue. It's how often you use it. People use them way too much. It's ridiculous. If the phone network went down it would be like the Southpark episode where everyone ended up in tent cities. I'd actually like to see that. It would be hilarious.