# SAR value should dictate decision?



## Soumik (Apr 2, 2011)

Hi guys,

I want to know if the SAR value of a phone should become a determining factor in choosing or not choosing a phone. The phones above the recommended value of 1.0, are they really that big a threat to the health, or only is it safe within 2.0?
I am asking this cause there are a lot of top phones now a days, which have 1+ SAR values, and people are still buying them.

Please give your views on this. I was getting tired of this wait game and was planning to get Defy, which i have a chance of getting at around 16K. But the SAR value is 1.52 !!! which is very high.


----------



## AndroidFan (Apr 2, 2011)

SAR is overhyped. 



> A cell phone's SAR, or its Specific Absorption Rate, is a measure of the amount of radio frequency (RF) energy absorbed by the body when using the handset.





> For a phone to receive FCC certification and be sold in the United States, its maximum SAR level must be less than 1.6 watts per kilogram. In Europe, the level is capped at 2 watts per kilogram, while Canada allows a maximum of 1.6 watts per kilogram.



Even the Europeans, who are paranoid about health and safety, allow SAR of 2 in their cellphones. So, I say, just buy a cellphone you like and stop worrying...

Cheers!


----------



## pauldmps (Apr 2, 2011)

If it is under allowed levels, no need to worry.


----------



## thetechfreak (Apr 2, 2011)

Don't worry. All reputed, good phones have low SAR value.

So dont worry continue your purchase.
If you are scared then you may search grmareana.com for specific model. It contains Sar value.


----------



## Soumik (Apr 2, 2011)

hmm... thanks for your inputs, then i wont worry about it. Ofcourse all reputed brands would keep it as low as possible. Defy's one was comparatively too high, so was worried. I know even iPhone4 is more than 1, while GSG had around <0.2, But if you say 1.6 is safe limits... there's nothing to worry about. 
Thanks again


----------



## ico (Apr 2, 2011)

If you're really paranoid about SAR, I'd suggest not to use any mobile fone at all.


----------



## thetechfreak (Apr 2, 2011)

Optimus One is one of lowest SAR value phone I've seen.

Only 0.7


----------



## Soumik (Apr 2, 2011)

Am not paranoid... but cummon, in the IT industry, one has to take of whatever health he can save... 
But anyways, i wont worry abt it while getting a phone now.
Just a query on same line, will the radiation damage be reduced by using bluetooth headset? I have seen the big shot guys use it a lot.. the people who are always on some call even on the move.


----------



## thetechfreak (Apr 2, 2011)

I think wired headsets will be better.

But yes, Bluetooth headsets do help.


----------



## AndroidFan (Apr 3, 2011)

Soumik said:


> Am not paranoid... but cummon, in the IT industry, one has to take of whatever health he can save...
> But anyways, i wont worry abt it while getting a phone now.
> Just a query on same line, will the radiation damage be reduced by using bluetooth headset? I have seen the big shot guys use it a lot.. the people who are always on some call even on the move.



What radiation damage are you talking about? There is no radiation damage due to cell phones... Its all a lie...

I sit all day near my wireless router, which is a radio (sends and receives data via radio waves, i.e. radiation) both at home and in the office. Been doing that for 3 years now... 

Add to it there is radiation from the Sun (which I cannot stop), 4 FM radio channels, AM radio, all the digital tvs (dish tv, big tv, etc) which transmit their signals through the air, doordarshan, half a dozen mobile phone operators, my neighbor's wifi... I am drowning in all kinds of radiation...

So, if this SAR **** was true, then my brain would have become a fried egg. But as far as I know, that didn't happen.

So stop worrying... and enjoy your phone... 

Cheers!


----------



## Soumik (Apr 3, 2011)

^^ haha thats really reassuring...  
I guess all that radiation absorbed, gets converted into useful energy and not just heat burning up cells. Hence no damage 
hehe anyways... got my head cleared.. SAR isnt gonna be a deciding factor...  

BTW!!! CHEERS TO INDIA AND ALL OF US INDIANS OUT HERE FOR WINNING THE CRICKET WORLD CUP 2011 !!!!


----------



## thetechfreak (Apr 3, 2011)

> There is no radiation
> damage due to cell phones..


 There is no risk you sit nearby. Cellphone? There is risk.

But again, don't let SAR value be a deciding factor.


----------



## pauldmps (Apr 3, 2011)

AndroidFan said:


> What radiation damage are you talking about? There is no radiation damage due to cell phones... Its all a lie...
> 
> I sit all day near my wireless router, which is a radio (sends and receives data via radio waves, i.e. radiation) both at home and in the office. Been doing that for 3 years now...
> 
> ...



Absolutely wrong logic. 

Not all sources of radiation has enough frequency to cause damage to cells. Also it depends on the intensity of radiation i.e. the distance of the source from your body.

The radio sources you mentioned do not have enough frequency & intensity to cause cell damage. A mobile phone has much higher intensity of radiation & the antenna is placed near your brain while talking so the risk is much higher.

And most of the high frequency radiation from the sun is absorbed by the ozone layer of the earth. Otherwise your skin would've burned by now.


----------



## AndroidFan (Apr 3, 2011)

pauldmps said:


> Absolutely wrong logic.
> 
> Not all sources of radiation has enough frequency to cause damage to cells. Also it depends on the intensity of radiation i.e. the distance of the source from your body.
> 
> ...



As I said, even Europeans allow SAR of 2.

But I have never seen any unbiased report that supports the theory that cell phones have enough radiation to cause damage to the brain. If you have any links to such a scientific paper or research, please share.


----------



## pauldmps (Apr 3, 2011)

There were researches & counter researches on this issue & most of the results contradicted each other.

But recently the scientists have agreed that it causes "unusual brain activity" but they are still unable to define what kind of unusual activity.

Cellphonesâ€™ Startling Effects on Your Brain, New Study - The Daily Beast


----------



## thetechfreak (Apr 3, 2011)

A few days back I read in a local Daily

Smart phone not a very smart chice.

There is was written Apple and HTC reccomend users to keep phone atleast 25mm away from ears.


----------



## Soumik (Apr 4, 2011)

25mm from ears?? :S Cant they just say use external earphones?
Its clear that radiation damage will be caused by cell phones. And higher the SAR, the more is the danger. 
We should not take "unusual brain activity" as anything other than bad. 
Man, now i am thinking i should definitely get a new handset soon cause i lost my earphones long time back!!! :'(
But you, its not always possible to get a headphone when the phone rings. So, isnt it better to get a phone which has the least SAR value?


----------



## ico (Apr 5, 2011)

Soumik said:


> So, isnt it better to get a phone which has the least SAR value?


Like I posted earlier, if you are really paranoid about SAR, just don't use mobile fones.

There is practically no difference between 1.4 or 1.7 for me. Both are doing enough harm to you. *Just don't use a mobile.* That is it.


----------



## Soumik (Apr 5, 2011)

^^ yeah but am not comparing 1.4 and 1.7... its about 0.24 (if i remember correctly of SGS.. other in similar series should be similar) and 1.52 of Defy. Thats a lot of difference.
Anyways.. its head phones for me from now on... as soon as i get a long call, am gonna use headphones... that should solve the problem. I hope it affects only the brain part... i mean if i keep in shirt or pant pocket it shouldnt cause any "unusual activity" rite?


----------



## ico (Apr 5, 2011)

Soumik said:


> I hope it affects only the brain part... i mean if i keep in shirt or pant pocket it shouldnt cause any "unusual activity" rite?


It will affect some other part of your body if you'll keep yer mobile in your pant pocket. I hope you understood what I'm talking about.  If you'll keep it in your shirt pocket, then it will affect your heart. 

The thing is, if you are really concerned about SAR, don't use mobiles.


----------



## Soumik (Apr 5, 2011)

^^ ok got it .
any alternate to mobile phones in ur suggestions?


----------



## AndroidFan (Apr 5, 2011)

Soumik said:


> ^^ ok got it .
> any alternate to mobile phones in ur suggestions?



Pigeons?


----------



## Soumik (Apr 5, 2011)

^^ yeah may be... Google employed super pigeons with 3G class boosters under their wings...
Might actually work. A lot more eco friendly.


----------



## chandujr (Oct 6, 2011)

AndroidFan said:


> SAR is overhyped.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



"The rate at which radiation is absorbed by the human body is measured by the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), and its maximum levels for modern handsets have been set by governmental regulating agencies in many countries. In the USA, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has set a SAR limit of 1.6 W/kg, averaged over a volume of 1 gram of tissue, for the head. In Europe, the limit is 2 W/kg, averaged over a volume of 10 grams of tissue. SAR values are heavily dependent on the size of the averaging volume. Without information about the averaging volume used, comparisons between different measurements cannot be made. Thus, the European 10-gram ratings should be compared among themselves, and the American 1-gram ratings should only be compared among themselves."

source: en.wikipedia.org


----------

