• AccurstDemon@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Electromagnetic radiation, as in visible light, radio signals or as this Iphone has a fucking RMBK melting its core inside?

    Someone has a link to those test they performed to claim this?

    I call it bullshit

    • huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Microwaves. It’s microwaves.

      Phones are slightly above FM radio and slightly below microwaves in terms of wavelength.

      They’re a non-ionizing radiation emitter.

      The radiation emitted by phones ain’t gonna hurt ya.

      • umbraroze@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s right! However, remember that bananas have potassium-40 in it, which is radioactive. Not much, though. So be very very mildly careful around bananaphones! /old joke

        • isthingoneventhis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Back in the early 00s there was this wave of “phones give you cancer” panic and my friends father made them put on this stupid sticker on the back of their phone to “stop the radiation”. Anyways it was stupid and your comment reminded me of it xD

          • Shard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            You take that back!

            I had a sticker that had flashing LEDs powered solely on the radiation coming from the phone. It was awesome.

            • isthingoneventhis@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I thiiiiiiink this was fear mongering in line with the whole uh… Hannity? Whatever that maniacs name was who has/had the AM station. Basically the pre-fox republican mouthpiece.

              • FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Are you thinking of Rush Limbaugh? Who later actually died of (lung) cancer because he wouldn’t stop smoking?

                • isthingoneventhis@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Uhhhhhhh I’ve mostly blocked it out, but maybe? It was just some dude that yelled a lot and I vividly remember being in the car when the soliders or whatever had recently been beheaded (it was on the news cycle?), and he was like “hrrr drrr people are trying to keep the truth away from 'mericans!” so he aired part of the audio clip of them being beheaded???!?!

                  idk it was fucked.

              • Wisely@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It might actually have actually been local Fox News on OTA TV. That was one of the only couple of channels the antenna brought in to watch. Guess they have been at it for a long time.

                • isthingoneventhis@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No this was on AM radio 0: my mom specifically listened to him on AM because idk he was too radical or whatever for FM? lol idk how it works, but they have been at it for a long while.

        • cloud@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Also remember that plants have been around before humans and that we evolved to resist natural radiations. We haven’t evolved yet to be around devices that produces more radiations than the limit agreed by scientists

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Radioactive bananas is a relatively new thing resulting from all the nuclear bomb testing that went on from the 40s in to the 90s.

      • gaael@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I seem to remember it was not a ionization issue but something with local temperatures increases around the ear when you were using it without an earset.

        Anyway, Apples knows what the norms are, decided not to care, gets caught and has to retire a phone, nothing exceptional here.

        • marmarama@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I doubt they’d have to retire the phone - digital radio power levels are normally pretty easy to change in the radio firmware. Which also means it’s pretty easy to change, intentionally or unintentionally, in a later OS version.

          Perhaps Apple chose to cheat to improve reception after mandatory testing was complete and the phone was available to buy, figuring they’d never get caught out. Perhaps Apple didn’t retest with later OS versions and it was unintentional. We will probably never know.

          • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They could have changed things through updates which exacerbated the issue and made the modem emit more.

            I have no clue if that is why but that would be my bet.

            I’m kind of surprised they would have been able to release the device and ship it to customers with that issue in the first place.

      • cloud@lazysoci.al
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can’t you read? The article says the EU has a limit of 4 watts per kilogram and the device produces more than that. Scientists agreed on that limit.

      • Obinice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is it 2023, when everybody uses microwave radios for communication constantly, and there are still people that don’t understand the absolute basics, like the difference between radio/light radiation and ionising radiation? And how important transmit power is to how dangerous or not a radio wave is?

        They do teach this stuff in schools still, right?

        It boggles my mind. It’s not some complex difficult topic, it’s like not knowing how electricity works, or how your body works. This is basic child level knowledge that everybody interacts with every single day, so it behoves them to understand it at least at an introductory level.

      • TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is likely mostly true, but there is evidence brain tumor rates went up when handheld cell phones came into widespread use.

        • TheFonz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Also more marvel movies came out. It’s interesting how often we have to repeat the correlation/causation joke and people still struggle with it.

    • Kabe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      To be fair, it’s not completely made-up. There is a body of evidence that suggests that even non-ionizing EM radiation may have so-called “biological effects” in humans.

      Organizations like the Environmental Health Trust have been banging the “cellphones cause infertility and cancer” drum for years, and cites numerous studies on their website.

      Of course, much of this research is of questionable relevance to real-world use cases involving actual phones and actual humans as opposed to, say, a bunch of rats being exposed to low-power microwaves in a lab for hours on end, but it exists nonetheless.

        • cloud@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Meanwhile apple and chinese factories have 0 interests in shadowing researches that could put in danger their biggest source of income

        • Kabe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Certainly, but the existence of this research is why countries like France are taking this precautionary approach.

          • huginn@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is research that exists suggesting that the Nazis are currently plotting their return from a moon base.

            France should take the precautionary approach of nuking the dark side of the moon.

            Equally valid.

            • Kabe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I get that you’re trying to be funny, but no they’re not exactly “equally valid”.

              The WHO lists RF waves (including those from cellphones) under category Group 2B of possible carcinogens, along with a bunch of other stuff.

              Are they being overly cautious? Almost certainly, yes. However, the idea is not inherently ridiculous.

      • fadhl3y@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        EHTrust are mad as a box of frogs. They claim that phones cause cancer, which is something that all major cancer research charities dispute. Nothing they say can be taken seriously.

  • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The agency said the iPhone 12 met the threshold when radiation levels were assessed for a phone kept in a jacket or in a bag.

    Free bumpers incoming

      • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure. All EM waves are radiation, including visible light.

        Non ionizing radiation isn’t an issue though so nobody uses “radiation” for it. When you say “radiation” that’s pretty much always talking about ionizing radiation from radioactive sources.

        The iPhone does not emit any ionizing radiation.

      • TheGreatFox@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey, don’t kink shame. Some people like pressing their heads against french nuclear reactors.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Finally someone I can come out to.

          I’m a reactor licker, and proud of it.

          The taste is so energetic!

      • hddsx@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only in a jacket or bag. I love my new pocket nuclear reactor. It’s the smallest nuclear reactor ever, and I think you’re going to love it