Anyone know what is the SAR radiation level for HTC One ? Haven't been able to find any info online
32GB
Head: 1.26 W/kg
Body: 0.69 W/kg
Product Specific Use: 0.69 W/kg
Simultaneous Transmission:1.58 W/kg
64GB
Head:1.16 W/kg
Body:0.72 W/kg
Product Specific Use: 0.72 W/kg
Simultaneous Transmission:1.45 W/kg
All I know is that in comparison samsung plastic phones never go past 0,4 W/kg even 0.2 on the note 2.
epicfailguy2 said:
All I know is that in comparison samsung plastic phones never go past 0,4 W/kg even 0.2 on the note 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
S3
--------------------------
Head:0.49 W/kg
Body:1.02 W/kg
Product Specific Use:1.02 W/kg
Simultaneous Transmission:1.58 W/kg
S4
--------------------
Head:0.52 W/kg
Body:1.10 W/kg
Product Specific Use:1.10 W/kg
Simultaneous Transmission:1.58 W/kg
Note2
------------------------
Head:0.17 W/kg
Body:0.40 W/kg
Product Specific Use:0.94 W/kg
Simultaneous Transmission:0.95 W/kg
fcc.gov/guides/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cell-phones-what-it-means-you
I am confused as when i called samsung and on there website for the sprint version its SAR rating are
Head .98 w/kg
body 1.58 w/kg
Where are people getting the lower ratings from?
Also all phones i have looked at the head is lower than body why would the htc one be different
I called them and they only have 1.26 w/kg but dont know if thats head or body
online i find
Head 1.26 w/kg
body .69 w/kg
So these mean that when on the phone your head gets exposed to that much "Heating" or radiation and body is how much your waist gets when holstered to your side?
I am just interested on how these numbers work . To me if the different cell phones are on the same freequency and same distance from a tower it should be similar ratings or they would not get the same signal?? Im just confused on how this works.
I dont see how you can have a lower rating and have the same service?
Thanks for any input on this!
Did you read the link directly above your post? Let me make it hot-clickable for you:
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cell-phones-what-it-means-you
Some of those questions are answered there.
Somehow I clicked thanks even though my actual feeling about your post was less than thankful. Anyway welcome to XDA. Now you have one post, and one thanks.
NxNW said:
Did you read the link directly above your post? Let me make it hot-clickable for you:
Some of those questions are answered there.
Somehow I clicked thanks even though my actual feeling about your post was less than thankful. Anyway welcome to XDA. Now you have one post, and one thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didnt mean to make anyone mad i did read that but dont understand how body vs head is opsite what the other phones are? the head is higher than body on the one but the others body is higher!
So all the websites saying look for a lower SAR rating really dont mean anything as thats the max output on the given phone with all freequncys used so it really depends on what carrier you have and freequency is used to find the true reading for the phone!
And SAR dosnt really give real world infor for comparison just because one phones max is hight it might run lower than the phone with a lower max.
Not mad, it just didn't sound like a lot of research had been done first. But I guess you've put some thought into this so I'll lighten up.
All the things you bring up are valid reasons why a single SAR number doesn't help you predict how much radiation you are getting at any given moment.
They are what they are: a way to compare the worst-case performance of two phones.
First paragraph of wikipedia article explains head vs body thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app
The maximum difference in SAR level between any two phones is equivalent to a 0.1°C change in ambient temperature*.
Most people wouldn't consider that particularly significant.
*The number is made up, but probably not far off.
Why would anybody care about the SAR level?
Hopefully we won't have any reason to care. But before you sound so smug just remember there's a difference between *expecting* that 100 years of radiation near your body won't hurt anyone and *knowing* that 100 years of radiation near your body didn't hurt anyone. We are running an uncontrolled experiment on the entire population of the earth and there is no real precedent for this. I share your optimism that this will be no big deal. Or if it is, we'll fix it as soon as it becomes clear. Still, we won't *know* how it plays out until we have a generation of kids that grows into old age after having been marinated in this stuff for an entire lifespan.
Related
I have been wondering about the SAR rating on the Tytn 2, and what affect the different radios has on this rating.
I like my phones to have lower SAR ratings, but it appears the default AT&T Radio comes with a 1.4 W/kg rating (According to the TILT Manual)
However, I look at the rating on the Kaiser (HTC Manual) and see a much lower rating of .70 W/kg.
I was wondering if there was any way to know the SAR Ratings of the different radios for the Kaiser, and if I could change mine accordingly???
That's an interesting question. I would be curious to know the answer myself.
-Jay
anyone have any information concerning this issue?
Glad I went with the TYTN II.
stmasi said:
Glad I went with the TYTN II.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol ok.....
but again, my theory is it's just the default radio that changes this.
So install a new radio, and problem solved.
Anyone have some info ?
redsrule2500 said:
I have been wondering about the SAR rating on the Tytn 2, and what affect the different radios has on this rating.
I like my phones to have lower SAR ratings, but it appears the default AT&T Radio comes with a 1.4 W/kg rating (According to the TILT Manual)
However, I look at the rating on the Kaiser (HTC Manual) and see a much lower rating of .70 W/kg.
I was wondering if there was any way to know the SAR Ratings of the different radios for the Kaiser, and if I could change mine accordingly???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't worry. Both values are the same. The way of measuring the sar value is the reason of the difference. (in europe the max sar is measured in 10g of tissue cube, in US they use a 1g of tissue cube)
The only real difference is the maximum alowed sar.
see: http://www.sarvalues.com/index.html
I've never been one to buy into the cancer causing aspect of mobile phones, but after recently seeing the City of San Francisco pass a law requiring cell phones show there radiation output it got me thinking .
How much radiation does the N1 put out? How is that in comparison to other phones? Do smart phones put out higher amounts of radiation?
My biggest concern, and what got me thinking was the fact that until 6 mos. or so ago, I only had the phone near my head on the occasional phone call (duh).
But now I have a Nexus dock that I use as my alarm/bedside clock. This thing sits near my head 7-8 hrs every single night running bluetooth, etc.
Is there legitimate reason for concern?
I realize this should prolly go in the overall General thread, but I'm never up there and I'm mostly curious about the N1's radiation while using the desktop dock.
grb said:
I've never been one to buy into the cancer causing aspect of mobile phones, but after recently seeing the City of San Francisco pass a law requiring cell phones show there radiation output it got me thinking .
How much radiation does the N1 put out? How is that in comparison to other phones? Do smart phones put out higher amounts of radiation?
My biggest concern, and what got me thinking was the fact that until 6 mos. or so ago, I only had the phone near my head on the occasional phone call (duh).
But now I have a Nexus dock that I use as my alarm/bedside clock. This thing sits near my head 7-8 hrs every single night running bluetooth, etc.
Is there legitimate reason for concern?
I realize this should prolly go in the overall General thread, but I'm never up there and I'm mostly curious about the N1's radiation while using the desktop dock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're so worried. Move to a cave dude. Do you know how many "wireless" signals and radio transmissions there are in a city?
23548723958723985729837652983572 to be precise.
Why don't you get a Geiger Counter if you're that paranoid?
wait, every phone goes thru FCC testing and given a SAR's rating, and this info is available for every phone on the market. the nexus was rather low at around 0.7 if i remember. what is this radiation thing that san francisco is asking for? i thought it would be the same thing.
for more info on radiation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_radiation_and_health
list of highest radiation phones:
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6602_7-5020357-1.html
FCC says SAR is 0.37 head / 0.74 Body W/Kg for 1gram on GSM.
international standards use 2grams which would make it max at 1.39. The US max is 1.6
geiger meter isnt going to help -_-
what is this radiation thing that san francisco is asking for?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/16/us/16cell.html
It's just simply a law that will require all retailers to display the amount of radiation each phone emits.
If you're so worried. Move to a cave dude. Do you know how many "wireless" signals and radio transmissions there are in a city?
23548723958723985729837652983572 to be precise.
Why don't you get a Geiger Counter if you're that paranoid?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Easy Tiger, I'm not paranoid, just asking a question that I'm sure others have more knowledge about than I do.
And thanks to flybyme's helpful cnet link I found this piece of information:
If you're concerned about limiting your SAR exposure, you can take a few easy steps beyond purchasing a handset with a low SAR. You can text instead placing a voice call, use a speakerphone whenever possible, and carry your phone at least one inch from your body. Some researchers also caution against using your phone in areas with poor coverage since phones emit more radiation when searching for a signal. Children, which have smaller and thinner skulls, should limit cell phone use, and all users, children and adults, should not sleep with an active phone next to their bedside or under their pillow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
plus, dont mobile phones emit the msot radiation when you're in a call?otherwise, when its standby all its doing is jus in the bath of EM waves that we all are in...
Did you not read the study that stated phone radiation actuality reduces the chances of developing Alzheimer's?
http://arstechnica.com/science/news...tion-may-show-reduced-alzheimers-symptoms.ars
Look there's even a picture of the N1 there. Look on PubMed or something for a definitive study.
Antiskunk said:
Did you not read the study that stated phone radiation actuality reduces the chances of developing Alzheimer's?
http://arstechnica.com/science/news...tion-may-show-reduced-alzheimers-symptoms.ars
Look there's even a picture of the N1 there. Look on PubMed or something for a definitive study.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, and the fact that using a handphone also makes you smarter compared to those who don't use one.
Hi Guys,
I was surprised that wonderful Moto X has a high SAR value, as you can see with following link it's 1.39 W/kg (head) and 0.50 W/kg (body).
Do you have any idea how it could be decreased?
http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_moto_x-5601.php
Thank you,
Andrey
NayOn said:
Hi Guys,
I was surprised that wonderful Moto X has a high SAR value, as you can see with following link it's 1.39 W/kg (head) and 0.50 W/kg (body).
Do you have any idea how it could be decreased?
http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_moto_x-5601.php
Thank you,
Andrey
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With proper use. In my opinion there is a recognasable diiference between USA and European or Asian SAR measuring systems. Even for the same phone those two values might be significantly different. And declared values are always peak values. So the phone with better signal power adjusting system might virtualy radiate less than one with lower value declared. Look at the Cninese phones, majority of them have SAR between 0.2 and 0.5. I don't feel that they are really so effective, usually they are technically less progresive that those from main brands and much higher declared SAR. It would be interesting to compare two phones with significantly different SAR in real environment under the same conditions.
You need to look at the detailed specs to know the SAR to expect when you're actually using it. The SAR can change quite a bit depending on band and if wifi hotspot is turned on etc.
Guys,
Thank you for your input!
I had conversation about this with scientist who research domestic emission and it's his opinion that doesn't matter what SAR if you use phone for calls less than 15 minutes per day and it's my case so I purchased phone and will join to MOTO X users since this weekend!!!
Best Regards,
Andrey
I was just browsing reddit and I found an interesting post about our Nexus 6. The phone has a SAR value of 1.56., which is barely under the legal limit of 1.6. For those who do not know, SAR is a measure of the radiation emitted by phones. Was just wondering if anyone knew this, or is worried since our SAR value is high.
my right side of my head glows(im right handed), does that count? :silly:
That's why my left boy has gotten bigger! [emoji13]
The iPhone 6 has a SAR value of 1.58, and the 6 Plus has a rating if 1.59. Comparatively, ours is low!
All about prospective.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
ok, im gonna go out on a limb and assume that most people arent bothered.
.... I so do not care. ^^^
Isn't there anyone a bit worried about the high SAR value(radiation) of the s10?
Looking at the attached link, there are worse phones.
I haven't had any issues with my S8+, which is similar and both are within allowable limits.
https://www.devicespecifications.com/en/model-sar/f0d64f1d
mab71 said:
Isn't there anyone a bit worried about the high SAR value(radiation) of the s10?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is directly from the FCC,
"ALL cell phones must meet the FCC’s RF exposure standard, which is set at a level well below that at which laboratory testing indicates, and medical and biological experts generally agree, adverse health effects could OCCUR."
Tel864 said:
This is directly from the FCC,
"ALL cell phones must meet the FCC’s RF exposure standard, which is set at a level well below that at which laboratory testing indicates, and medical and biological experts generally agree, adverse health effects could OCCUR."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It must not be 1.6 and above... S10 is 1.5 something... Very near to 1.6... It's now like the oneplus and xiaomi phones. Very worrying trend... Samsung phones used to have the lowest values
mab71 said:
It must not be 1.6 and above... S10 is 1.5 something... Very near to 1.6... It's now like the oneplus and xiaomi phones. Very worrying trend... Samsung phones used to have the lowest values
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Worrying? Did you read the post by @Tel864? Level well below that causes health effects. We're fine.
Tel864 said:
This is directly from the FCC,
"ALL cell phones must meet the FCC’s RF exposure standard, which is set at a level well below that at which laboratory testing indicates, and medical and biological experts generally agree, adverse health effects could OCCUR."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mab71 said:
It must not be 1.6 and above... S10 is 1.5 something... Very near to 1.6... It's now like the oneplus and xiaomi phones. Very worrying trend... Samsung phones used to have the lowest values
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you vegan?
mab71 said:
It must not be 1.6 and above... S10 is 1.5 something... Very near to 1.6... It's now like the oneplus and xiaomi phones. Very worrying trend... Samsung phones used to have the lowest values
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hold your breath there is carbon monoxide in the air, brace yourself for 5G, oh and the zombie apocalypse is coming
Seriously yes we are living in a toxic world, adapt we must.....
mab71 said:
It must not be 1.6 and above... S10 is 1.5 something... Very near to 1.6... It's now like the oneplus and xiaomi phones. Very worrying trend... Samsung phones used to have the lowest values
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keep in mind that those values are from tests conducted on mice and according to some experts, you would have to keep the phone to your ear 10 hours a day for months to even have a chance of getting harmful radiation.
One warning though, I would keep you mouse off the phone as much a possible because we know how they love to talk.
Tel864 said:
Keep in mind that those values are from tests conducted on mice and according to some experts, you would have to keep the phone to your ear 10 hours a day for months to even have a chance of getting harmful radiation.
One warning though, I would keep you mouse off the phone as much a possible because we know how they love to talk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any link to verify this?
Non ionizing radiation, yeah not concerned. The only way cellular radiation hurts you is the warning it can cause, and the power levels needed are orders of magnitude larger to appreciably raise your tissues temperature.
I think u guys don't know about the exynos versions... All of them have near the limit values..
European Union - 2.0
US - 1.6
If the numbers bother you then don't buy the phone. It's been deemed safe because those numbers are well below the danger levels. If the phone is taped to your head then you have a problem, if not, the sky isn't falling and the phone is safe.
Tel864 said:
European Union - 2.0
US - 1.6
If the numbers bother you then don't buy the phone. It's been deemed safe because those numbers are well below the danger levels. If the phone is taped to your head then you have a problem, if not, the sky isn't falling and the phone is safe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
U act as if u know everything... The radiation levels indicated are not only for head but also body distance from the phone.. So if people play games for hours or put the phone in their pockets for a long time there is bound to be some effect.
Nobody's asking u not to buy the phone... It's your head and body. No need to talk about the sky falling.
mab71 said:
U act as if u know everything... The radiation levels indicated are not only for head but also body distance from the phone.. So if people play games for hours or put the phone in their pockets for a long time there is bound to be some effect.
Nobody's asking u not to buy the phone... It's your head and body. No need to talk about the sky falling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But again, it's non-ionizing radiation. You would get more of this type of radiation living close to an airport than having the phone in your pocket.
mab71 said:
I think u guys don't know about the exynos versions... All of them have near the limit values..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was surprised to see this but to my another surprise huawei is doing so good with huawei mate 20 pro with sar value of head:0.40, body:0.96
Even the p30 pro has head:0.67, body:0.99 which is well below the limit. Samsung is just getting greedy their phones have head sar low but body sar is way too high.
Looking forward to s11, note 10, mate 30 pro
---------- Post added at 04:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:06 PM ----------
mab71 said:
U act as if u know everything... The radiation levels indicated are not only for head but also body distance from the phone.. So if people play games for hours or put the phone in their pockets for a long time there is bound to be some effect.
Nobody's asking u not to buy the phone... It's your head and body. No need to talk about the sky falling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
100% agree :good: