LG LG325G Owners Manual - English - Page 42

energy RF exposures, the effects of radiofrequency - cell phone

Page 42 highlights

stations are thus not the subject of the safety questions discussed in this document. 3. What kinds of phones are the subject of this update? The term 'wireless phone' refers here to handheld wireless phones with built-in antennas, often called 'cell', 'mobile', or 'PCS' phones. These types of wireless phones can expose the user to measurable radiofrequency energy (RF) because of the short distance between the phone and the user's head. These RF exposures are limited by FCC safety guidelines that were developed with the advice of the FDA and other federal health and safety agencies. When the phone is located at greater distances from the user, the exposure to RF is drastically lower because a person's RF exposure decreases rapidly with increasing distance from the source. The so-called 'cordless phones,' which have a base unit connected to the telephone wiring in a house, typically operate at far lower power levels, and thus produce RF exposures far below the FCC safety limits. 4. What are the results of the research done already? The research done thus far has produced conflicting results, and many studies have suffered from flaws in their research methods. Animal experiments investigating the effects of radiofrequency energy (RF) exposures characteristic of wireless phones have yielded conflicting results that often cannot be repeated in other laboratories. A few animal studies, however, have suggested that low levels of RF could accelerate the development of cancer in laboratory animals. However, many of the studies that showed increased tumor development used animals that had been genetically engineered or treated with cancer causing chemicals so as to be pre-disposed to develop cancer in the absence of RF exposure. Other studies exposed the animals to RF for up to 22 hours per day. These 41

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111

41
stations are thus not the subject of
the safety questions discussed in
this document.
3. What kinds of phones are the
subject of this update?
The term ‘wireless phone’ refers
here to handheld wireless phones
with built-in antennas, often
called ‘cell’, ‘mobile’, or ‘PCS’
phones. These types of wireless
phones can expose the user to
measurable radiofrequency energy
(RF) because of the short distance
between the phone and the user’s
head. These RF exposures are
limited by FCC safety guidelines
that were developed with the
advice of the FDA and other federal
health and safety agencies. When
the phone is located at greater
distances from the user, the
exposure to RF is drastically lower
because a person’s RF exposure
decreases rapidly with increasing
distance from the source. The
so-called ‘cordless phones,’ which
have a base unit connected to
the telephone wiring in a house,
typically operate at far lower
power levels, and thus produce
RF exposures far below the FCC
safety limits.
4. What are the results of the
research done already?
The research done thus far has
produced conflicting results, and
many studies have suffered from
flaws in their research methods.
Animal experiments investigating
the effects of radiofrequency
energy (RF) exposures
characteristic of wireless phones
have yielded conflicting results that
often cannot be repeated in other
laboratories. A few animal studies,
however, have suggested that
low levels of RF could accelerate
the development of cancer in
laboratory animals. However,
many of the studies that showed
increased tumor development used
animals that had been genetically
engineered or treated with cancer
causing chemicals so as to be
pre-disposed to develop cancer in
the absence of RF exposure. Other
studies exposed the animals to RF
for up to 22 hours per day. These