This summer, the Chicago Tribune published the results of a survey concerning the specific absorption rate to which users of certain smartphones were exposed. The objective was to determine whether the
electromagnetic waves that the phones emitted complied or not with the legal limit. An investigation that revealed that the iPhone 7, 8 and X, as well as the
Galaxy S8 and S9 were in violation with rates sometimes 3 times higher than the standard imposed by the federal government.
Revelations that have pushed some users to turn against Samsung and Apple. In early December, a separate class action had been filed with the California district court against Samsung and Apple. A complaint that prompted the FCC, the United States Federal Communications Commission, to conduct further analyzes.
Now the conclusions are known, like the report Bloomberg. "The FCC claims that recent tests on
iPhone and Galaxy do not reveal violations of the body's maximum level of exposure to radio frequencies, "said Bloomberg on Twitter. This should dissipate the doubts and reassure the owners of the accused smartphones.
At the time of the facts, Apple had already spoken, saying that "all iPhone models, including the iPhone 7, are fully certified by the FCC and in all countries where the iPhone is marketed. After careful review and subsequent validation of all iPhone models tested in the report [from Chicago Tribune], we have confirmed that we are in compliance and that we comply with all applicable guidelines and exposure limits. "
Different methods of analysis
It is still interesting to note that the effects of electromagnetic waves on the human body are still debated in the scientific world. Besides, the maximum limits of electromagnetic waves are not the same whether we are on one side or the other of the Atlantic. Finally, there is no single, common method for measuring the specific absorption level of electronic devices. This is why it happens that the results are different.
In the case of the investigation of Chicago Tribune, the results were particularly puzzling since it was a question of emissions three times higher than the legal limit.
It remains to be seen whether the complainants will withdraw their complaint or not.