Welcome to Our WirelessAdvisor Community!

You are viewing our forums as a GUEST. Please join us so you can post and view all the pictures.
Registration is easy, fast and FREE!

Phone Antennas & Radiation - The Latest Round

Discussion in 'GENERAL Wireless Discussion' started by KevinJames, Oct 24, 2001.

  1. KevinJames

    KevinJames WA's 1st retired mod
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2001
    Messages:
    4,044
    Likes Received:
    739
    Location:
    Central Valley NorCA
    My Phone:
    Samsung S7-Edge
    Wireless Provider(s):
    AT&T & Verizon
    In the link below, there is some mildly interesting reading about new antenna designs that promise reduced radiation.

    http://www.wirelessnewsfactor.com/perl/story/13850.html

    And speaking of antennas: I am seeing more and more people &quot;fiddling&quot; with their phones while not in use. One of the most interesting is the practice of sticking the tip of the antenna in thier mouths. I see this mostly with retractable antennas that people grab with their teeth and then pull and shove the antenna in and out. This is not a safe thing to do <u>even</u> with the phone in stand-by mode.
     
  2. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I have a question regarding the safety of different technologies. I am currently a Sprint customer, and am in the market for a new carrier. I am either going to move to another CDMA carrier (Verizon), or VoiceStream, a GSM carrier (very appealing because of their new nationwide rates). However, I read some articles that stated that certain mobile technologies are more &quot;damaging&quot; than others. GSM, because it is primarily a pulsed signal, interferes with more electronic devices, as well as could potentially be more damaging to human cells. So - my question is...is this true? Is CDMA a &quot;safer&quot; technology than GSM or TDMA (which is also pulsed)?

    Here is a snapshot of one article that highlights this thought:



    Here are links to a few articles:
    &quot;CDMA - code division multiple access, and uses &quot;spread spectrum&quot;, or frequency hopping, a modulation method often used by the military. It was was devised by actress Hedy Lamarr, who passed away recently, and she developed it with composer George Antheil.
    It's benefits are that that the signal is very secure, that it is difficult to jam and that it does not generate interference. Basically rather &quot;stealty&quot;, unlike GSM that, although also secure, screams its presence by making virtually every electronic device around it sound like they have been on a baked-beans only diet.
    The other major benifit of the modulation method is that its range is not limited by the sharing method. In Time Division Multiple Access systems like GSM, each user on a channel has a short timeslot in which they can use the channel before the next user gets a turn. If the user is form that 32km in the case of GSM, the signal has not reached the base station before the timeslot expires, so the user is chucked off. This pulsing on and off is what generates the interference. Sharing on CDMA is a completely different system where the signal is spread across a wide bandwidth, and is not pulsed on and off. This method also reduces power radiated by the handset (200mW = 0.2W max) to a level far safer than that of a GSM handset (2W peak). It is also probable that the pulsed nature of GSM signals is the main cause of any risk, as cells are unable to turn their defences on in response to them like thay can with a more constant signal.&quot; (http://www.zeta.org.au/~julian/secrets.html)

    Here are some more links to relevant articles...
    http://www.arpansa.gov.au/mph_sys.htm
    http://pages.britishlibrary.net/orange/aust_equiv_nrpb_info.htm
     
  3. KevinJames

    KevinJames WA's 1st retired mod
    Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2001
    Messages:
    4,044
    Likes Received:
    739
    Location:
    Central Valley NorCA
    My Phone:
    Samsung S7-Edge
    Wireless Provider(s):
    AT&T & Verizon
    It sounds like you've done your research. I doubt there is much more to add to that.

    Wirelessnewsfactor.com (which I site in the original thread) has several articles on the continuing debate about radiation. Basically, there STILL isn't any proof of significant danger. Wirelessnewsfactor also indicates that CDMA uses lower power, thus adding to the safety concern. But all-considered, GSM and TDMA don't seem to be that much of a threat either. I've been using TDMA since 1994 and have used GSM for over 2 years. I am still waiting for my brain to get fried. (Kids, don't try this at home, but.... There have been times when both my personal and business phones rang at the same time and for a moment had both the GSM and TDMA sets up to an ear (looks very stupid, but I'm still sane). But then sanity is such a subjective thing anyway. :)

    Kevin
     
  4. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Larry -

    Who is your GSM carrier? I have a Sprint phone now, but want to change. I bought VoiceStream, but may return it as the information I have read is alarming. I think I will stay with CDMA and choose between Sprint and Verizon. However, I would like to see a European handset in the CDMA world.
     
  5. Guest

    Guest Guest

    The manufacturers of both GSM phones and CDMA phones all build phones over a range of power levels that are rated for Specific Absorption Ratio (SAR). I don't recall the FCC recommended limits, but I do remember that the some CDMA phones are higher (more powerful) than some GSM phones, and vice-a-versa. Bottom line, each phone has nearly the same _maximum_ transmit level (from which the SAR measurements are taken).

    More important than technology is the design of the cellular system (system engineering). More towers, located closer together, mean that the phone has to 'talk' at a lower power to reach the nearest tower antenna with a good signal. So the distribution of towers is a significant factor in this (i.e. SAR values alone don't tell you much).

    Finally, I believe that in the end, (aren't we there yet?), the years of medical research will show that you are no more likely to suffer ill effects from radio signals transmitted by a nearby cellular phone, than if you held a warm hotdog to the side of your face (the placebo in this case).

    In short, there are a TON of more serious dangers out there to worry about snuffing your existance out... think about those. And be careful when driving and talking.

    myurl
     
  6. Guest

    Guest Guest

  7. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I once had a terrible time with CPRD until Dr. Fubar helped me.
     
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Below is part three:


    Dr. Fubar can be reached at
    Rome@haveatake.com

    Dr Fubar can CURE CPRD!!!!!!


    Love and kisses,

    Tom
    (The cell phone demon)


    PART THREE
     

Share This Page

Copyright 1997-2018 Wireless Advisor™, LLC. All rights reserved. All registered and unregistered trademarks are the property of their respective holders.
WirelessAdvisor.com is not associated by ownership or membership with any cellular, PCS or wireless service provider companies and is not meant to be an endorsement of any company or service. Some links on these pages may be paid advertising or paid affiliate programs.

Positive SSL
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice