Monday, April 18, 2016

iPhone SE SAR: Radiation Levels & Separation Distance

What are the SAR values for Apple’s iPhone SE smart phone? 

What is the manufacturer's recommended minimum 
body separation distance?

How should consumers use this information?

Be sure to read the latest 
about cell phone use.

April 18, 2016

iPhone Radio-Frequency information

Here is the one-page info sheet that comes with a new iPhone. The third paragraph instructs consumers about how to find RF exposure information for their new cellphone.
"Exposure to Radio-Frequency Energy On iPhone go to Settings > General > About > Legal > RF Exposure. Or go to"
Does Apple really want consumers to see this information?

March 23, 2016

According to test reports filed with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for the iPhone SE for cellular transmission is 1.14 watts per kilogram (w/kg) at the head, and 1.14 w/kg when worn on the body. The wireless router SAR is also 1.14 w/kg. The SAR for simultaneous transmission (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.59 w/kg at the head, 1.58 w/kg when worn on the body, and 1.56 w/kg when the phone is used as a hotspot.

All SARs reported above are averaged over one gram of body tissue corresponding to the U.S. standard. According to the testing service, “The results documented in this report apply only to the tested sample, under the conditions and modes of operation as described herein.” The minimum separation distance for body-worn testing and hotspot exposure was 5 mm (about 0.2 of an inch). The SARs that the user experiences may vary depending upon the user's cell phone carrier. 

The SARs for the iPhone 6 models can be found at

What do SAR values mean to the consumer?

The legal limit for the SAR in the U.S. is 1.60 w/kg (averaged over one gram of tissue).

The FCC requires that all cell phone models be tested for their Specific Absorption Rate or SAR. The SAR is a measure of the maximum amount of microwave radiation absorbed by the head or the body. It is measured in a laboratory using an artificial model of a large adult male with different fluids to simulate human tissue. The SAR, which is measured in watts per kilogram, represents the maximum amount of energy absorbed in any one gram of tissue in the test model. Phones sold in the U.S. typically range in SAR values from about 0.20 w/kg up to the 1.60 legal limit. (3, 4)

The SAR test, adopted in 1996 by the FCC, was criticized by the U.S. Government Accountability Office in 2012. (5) The test does not reflect those who currently use cell phones, nor does it correspond to the way people use them. Today many children are cell phone users -- the child’s brain absorbs twice the radiation as the adult’s brain. Moreover, the artificial head does not contain any metal (e.g., dental fillings, earrings, or eyeglass frames) which could increase the radiation absorption beyond the measured SAR in the laboratory. (5)

The FCC assumes that consumers will carry their cell phones in a manufacturer-approved holder that keeps the phone a minimum distance away from the body. However, most people do not keep their phone in a cell phone holder. For the body-worn SAR test, the FCC allows the manufacturer to choose the separation distance between the cell phone and the test model as long as consumers are informed about the minimum distance tested. However, few consumers are aware of the manufacturer’s recommended minimum body separation distance from their cell phone because this information is often difficult to find. Thus, most consumers are in the dark about precautions they can take to keep their exposure to microwave radiation below the legal limit. This prompted the city of Berkeley, California to adopt landmark legislation that requires cellphone retailers to inform their customers about the manufacturer’s safety information.

To ensure that the cell phone does not exceed the legal limit, consumers should never keep their cell phone in their pockets or next to their skin. The cell phone is not tested directly against the body because almost all cell phones would fail the SAR test as the radiation absorption increases dramatically when the cell phone is close to the body.

Is the legal limit sufficient to protect the cell phone user’s health?

Federal policies in the U.S. could lead the public to believe that all legally-marketed cell phones are safe, and that a cell phone's SAR doesn't matter as long as it meets the legal limit: 1.6 watts per kilogram. (3, 4)

However, the Environmental Working Group and experts point out that the SAR only measures the maximum microwave absorption from cell phone use that perfectly matches laboratory conditions. The SAR is not a good indicator of one’s cumulative microwave exposure under naturalistic conditions.  The research evidence suggests that how one uses the phone (e.g., hands-free) and one’s cell phone carrier actually matters more than the phone’s SAR level.  (4, 6, 7)

The SAR standard was developed to protect users only from the acute effects of the heat generated by microwave radiation (i.e., the thermal effect). (5) The SAR limit does not protect users from the non-thermal effects caused by the cumulative exposure over time to cell phone radiation.

Yet, thousands of laboratory studies with animals and cell samples have found deleterious biologic effects from short-term exposure to low intensity cell phone radiation, including development of stress proteins, micronuclei, free radicals, DNA breakage, and sperm damage. (8) Human studies have also found that brief exposure to cell phone radiation alters brain activity and can open the blood-brain barrier which could enable chemical toxins in the circulatory system to penetrate the brain. (9)

Major studies with humans have found increased cancer risk, including a three-fold increase in brain cancer among those who used wireless phones (cell phones and cordless phones) for 25 or more years. (10)  Based upon this research, the World Health Organization in 2011 declared radiofrequency radiation "possibly carcinogenic" in humans (Group 2B). (11)

Other risks from cell phone use include reproductive health damage and male infertility, and neurological disorders (e.g., impaired cognitive functioning, headaches and migraines, and ADHD [attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorder]) in children. (12, 13)

Based upon the weight of the evidence from several decades of research including thousands of peer-reviewed published studies, many experts worldwide have signed declarations calling upon government to adopt stronger radiation standards to protect consumers from low intensity, non-thermal exposures from radiation associated with wireless communications, and to alert consumers about how to reduce their risk of harm. (14 -16) Recent evidence suggests that brain tumor incidence is increasing inthe U.S. and other countries and exposure to cell phone radiation may be contributing to this increase. (17) Two hundred and twenty (220) scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields and biology or health have now signed a petition, the International EMFScientist Appeal, calling for more protective limits on radiation from wireless devices including cellphones.

For tips on how to reduce your exposure to wireless radiation, see "
Some Tips to ReduceYour Exposure to Wireless Radiation". (18) In short, limit your use of the phone, keep the phone away from your body whenever it is powered on, use the phone hands-free, and turn off transmitters not in use (e.g., shut off Wi-Fi or use airplane mode).


(1) UL Verification Services, Inc . SAR Evaluation Report for Cellular Phone with Bluetooth and WLAN Radios. FCC ID: BCG-E3042A. Model Name: A1723, A1724. Report No. 15U21635-S1V2. Fremont, CA. Issue Date: 2/2/2016.

(2) Skipped.

(3) FCC. Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Cellular Telephones. Undated.

(4) FCC. “Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) For Cell Phones: What It Means For You.” Undated.

(5) Joel Moskowitz. “"Comments on the 2012 GAO Report: 'Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed'.:”

(6) Wolchover N. Radiation Risk: Are Some Cellphones More Dangerous Than Others? Life's Little Mysteries. June 23, 2011.

(7) Environmental Working Group. EWG’s Guide to Safer Cell Phone Use: Where is EWG's cell phone database? August 27 2013. 

(8) Giuliani L. Soffritti M. Non-thermal effects and mechanisms of interaction between electromagnetic fields and living matter. ICEMS Monograph. Bologna, Italy: National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer. 2010.

(9) Joel Moskowitz. “LTE Cell Phone Radiation Affects Brain Activity in Cell Phone Users.” Sep 20, 2013.

(10) Joel Moskowitz. “Brain Cancer Risk Increases with the Amount of Wireless Phone Use: Study.

(11) Joel Moskowitz. “Most Significant Government Health Report on Mobile Phone Radiation Ever Published.”

(12) Joel Moskowitz. “Cell Phone Radiation, Pregnancy, and Sperm.” Nov 19, 2012.

(13) Joel Moskowitz. “Cell Phone Use and Prenatal Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation May Cause Headaches in Children.“

(14) Joel Moskowitz. “Part I: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Key Testimony Submitted to the FCC.” Aug 4, 2014.

(15) Joel Moskowitz. “Part II: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Key Research Papers Submitted to the FCC.” Aug 4, 2014.

(16) Joel Moskowitz. “Part III: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--98 Scientific Experts Who Signed Resolutions.” Aug 4, 2014.

(17) Joel Moskowitz. Brain Tumor Rates are Increasing in the U.S.: The Role of Cell Phone and Cordless Phone Use.

(18) Joel Moskowitz. Some Tips to Reduce Your Exposure to Wireless Radiation  (one page handout). Undated.

Sunday, April 17, 2016

"Wireless Phone Radiation Risks & Public Health" April 16

The slides for this presentation can be downloaded from​

Wireless Phones: Radiation Risks and Public Health
 for kids

When:      2:30-3:30 pm, April 16, 2016 (Cal Day)
Where:    182 Dwinelle Hall, UC Berkeley

As wireless technologies, particularly cellphones, become ubiquitous in our culture, researchers have been asking the question: what, if any, impact is there from this technology on our health? Research has been conducted concerning wireless technology and cancer, reproductive health, fetal development, children's health and electromagnetic sensitivities, to name a few areas of concern.

In May of 2015 190 scientists from 39 nations signed an appeal which was submitted to the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO). All of these scientists have published peer-reviewed papers on the biological or health effects of non-ionizing radiation, part of the electromagnetic field (EMF) spectrum that includes Extremely Low Frequency fields used for electricity, and Radio Frequency radiation used for wireless communications. The International EMF Scientist Appeal calls upon the United Nations, the WHO, UNEP and all UN Member States to:
  • address the emerging public health crisis related to cell phones, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in neighborhoods; and
  • urge that the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) initiate an assessment of alternatives to current exposure standards and practices that could substantially lower human exposures to non-ionizing radiation.
To date, 220 scientists from 42 nations who have published peer-reviewed research on EMF and biology or health have signed the Appeal.

Last May, the City of Berkeley unanimously adopted a landmark cellphone "right to know" law that has recently been enacted despite a lawsuit filed by the telecom industry.

Featured speaker

Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD
, Director, Center for Family and Community Health, UC Berkeley School of Public Health. Dr. Moskowitz is an associate producer of the movie Mobilize: A Film about Cell Phone Radiation. His website is a valuable resource for journalists and the public. In the past year, he helped organize the International EMF Scientist Appeal ( and consulted on the Berkeley cell phone “right to know” ordinance.

More information about Cal Day: