Showing posts sorted by relevance for query AirPods:. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query AirPods:. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, January 13, 2025

AirPods: Are Apple’s New Wireless Earbuds Safe? (Blood-Brain Barrier research)

Fourth-Generation AirPods

The fourth generation of Apple's AirPods (aka AirPods 4) was introduced in 2024. 

The Specific Absorption Rate (or SAR) for the right AirPod is 0.11 watts per kilogram (assessed with the earbud facing the flat phantom and averaged over 1 gram of tissue). The SAR for the left AirPod is 1.19 watts per kilogram (assessed with the earbud's back facing the flat phantom and averaged over 1 gram of tissue) (1).


Third-Generation AirPods

The third generation of Apple's AirPods (aka AirPods 3) was introduced in 2021. 

The Specific Absorption Rate (or SAR) for the right AirPod is 0.626 watts per kilogram (assessed via the flat phantom & averaged over 1 gram of tissue) (1). The SAR for the left AirPod is 0.614 watts per kilogram (2). 

(2) https://fccid.io/BCG-A2564/RF-Exposure-Info/13685813-S1V2-FCC-Report-SAR-5479999


April 2, 2019

Second-Generation AirPods

The newly-released second generation of Apple's AirPods (aka AirPods 2) emits Bluetooth microwave radiation in the 2.402 – 2.480 GHz frequency range to communicate with a smart phone or other wireless device.

The Specific Absorption Rate (or SAR) for the right AirPod is 0.581 watts per kilogram (averaged over 1 gram). (1) The SAR for the left AirPod is 0.501 watts per kilogram. (2)

News about the potential health risks from use of wireless headsets first went viral in 2016 (see posts below). This story has gone viral again at this time for the following reasons:
  • Apple announced that it is taking orders for a new version of its wireless headset, AirPods (aka AirPods 2).
  • In the past year, two major studies found conclusive evidence that microwave radiation caused cancer in rats. These studies conducted by the National Toxicology Program in the U.S. and the Ramazzini Institute in Italy received worldwide media coverage.
  • The proliferation of new cell towers and antennas in preparation for the deployment of 5G,fifth generation cellular technology, has stimulated many people to seek out information about the health effects from exposure to the radiation these antennas emit on a 24-7 basis in their neighborhoods.
  • More people now realize we cannot trust governments to protect us from environmental toxins. Industry has too much influence over government regulatory agencies, and governments have conflicts of interest because the telecom industry pays governments substantial taxes and fees.
For some Bluetooth devices like Apple’s AirPods, the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), a measure of the body’s maximum exposure to microwave radiation, exceeds that of many smart phones. Moreover, the cumulative exposure to radiation from wireless headsets may be substantial since many users keep these devices on their head for hours at a time and use them to listen to music or podcasts.

I have found only two small studies that examined the short-term effects on hearing from exposure to Bluetooth, the communications standard use in AirPods and other wireless headsets (see below). The health effects from long-term exposure to this type of microwave radiation have not been studied.

The FCC minimum exposure levels were adopted in 1996 based largely upon recommendations from industry-funded scientists and engineers. The guidelines were designed only to protect us from short-term heating risks. We now have hundreds of studies that show harmful biologic and health effects from long-term exposure to low levels of microwave radiation that do not involve heating. The guidelines need to be updated to protect us from these effects.

Although there is no consensus regarding a safe level of exposure to microwave radiation, most scientists who have published research on the effects of this radiation agree that the current exposure limits are much too permissive. In fact, more than 240 scientists from 42 nations who have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields and biology or health totaling over 2,000 papers in professional journals have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal which calls for stronger exposure limits and health warnings. 

Most wireless safety tips recommend the use of wired headsets or hands-free use of smart phones and other electronic devices instead of wireless headsets.

News Stories

Are AirPods and Other Bluetooth Headphones Safe?
Markham Heid, Medium, March 7, 2019
https://medium.com/s/the-nuance/are-airpods-and-other-bluetooth-headphones-safe-214a0449e13a

Are wireless earbuds dangerous? Experts warn that Apple’s AirPods could send an electromagnetic field through your brain
Natalie Rahhal, Daily Mail, March 11, 2019 Revised March 12

Scientists warn wireless, Bluetooth devices may carry cancer risk

Healio: Hematology/Oncology Today, March 13, 2019
http://bit.ly/BTHealio

Earpods for Cell Phones — Are There Health Risks?

Roxanne Nelson, RN, BSN, Medscape Medical News, March 15, 2019
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/910453

Are Bluetooth Headphones Dangerous? Here’s What Experts Think
Julia Ries, Healthline, March 24, 2019 

Controversy surrounding safety of wireless earphones: News Focus 2 with Prof. Joel Moskowitz
This Morning, tbs eFM (Seoul, Korea), March 25, 2019 (10 minute audio)

Did 250 Scientists Warn that Apple Airpods Pose a Cancer Risk?
Bethania Palma, Snopes, March 28, 2019
References

(1) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Bluetooth Earbud. FCC ID: BCG-A2032. Model Name: A2032. Report Number: 12458150-S2V1. Issue Date: 3/15/2019. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/BCG-A2032/RF-Exposure-Info/12458150-S2V1-FCC-Report-SAR-4204549

(2) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Bluetooth Earbud. FCC ID: BCG-A2031. Model Name: A2031. Report Number: 12458150-S1V1. Issue Date: 3/15/2019. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/BCG-A2031/RF-Exposure-Info/12458150-S1V1-FCC-Report-SAR-4204479


December 13, 2016

Apple announced today that AirPods can be ordered online and will be available in stores next week. The wireless earbuds will be available in limited quantities in more than 100 countries and territories.

Apple originally planned to ship AirPods in October and has not explained the reason for the delay. The Wall Street Journal reported that the delay was due to problems with the Bluetooth wireless technology employed by this device.



September 12, 2016

Apple’s new AirPods are wireless earbuds that employ Bluetooth technology to communicate with your smart phone, laptop, or smart watch. 

According to Apple, “After a simple one-tap setup, AirPods are automatically on and always connected.”

The Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for the AirPods

The right AirPod emits Bluetooth microwave radiation in the 2.402 – 2.480 GHz frequency range to communicate with a smart phone or other wireless device. The Specific Absorption Rate (or SAR) for the right AirPod is 0.466 watts per kilogram (averaged over 1 gram). (1) The SAR  for the left AirPod is 0.510 watts per kilogram. (2)

For more information about the SAR see my post on the iPhone 7.

If one uses the AirPods many hours a day, the cumulative exposure to the brain from this microwave radiation could be substantial. 

According to EE Times, the left AirPod communicates with the right AirPod using a different technology, "near field magnetic induction (NFMI)."

Although there is a substantial research literature on the health risks of exposure to magnetic fields, I am not aware of any biologic research that examines NFMI. Hence, this post focuses on the risks to the brain from exposure to Bluetooth radiation. 

Is Bluetooth safe?

The wireless industry argues that devices that use Bluetooth are safe because the microwave radiation emitted by such devices is low compared to FCC guidelines. The FCC requires the SAR to be 1.6 watts per kilogram or less.

More than 240 scientists who have published research on electromagnetic radiation safety believe that current national and international guidelines for exposure to radio frequency radiation are inadequate to protect human health (see the International EMF Scientist Appeal).

In August 2022, I found only two peer-reviewed studies have examined the effects of exposure to Bluetooth radiation. The studies which employed small samples evaluated the effects of brief exposure to Bluetooth radiation on the auditory system. Given the study limitations, the absence of significant effects is not surprising. These studies do not provide the basis to argue that long-term exposure to Bluetooth radiation is safe. 

The following new study suggests there may be long-term effects from Bluetooth exposure, "Epidemiological exploration of the impact of bluetooth headset usage on thyroid nodules using Shapley additive explanations method"

Zhou N, Qin W, Zhang JJ, Wang Y, Wen JS, Lim YM. Epidemiological exploration of the impact of bluetooth headset usage on thyroid nodules using Shapley additive explanations method. Sci Rep. 2024 Jun 21;14(1):14354. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-63653-0.

Abstract

With an increasing prevalence of thyroid nodules globally, this study investigates the potential correlation between the use of Bluetooth headsets and the incidence of thyroid nodules, considering the cumulative effects of non-ionizing radiation (NIR) emitted by these devices. In this study, we analyzed 600 valid questionnaires from the WenJuanXing platform using Propensity Score Matching (PSM) and the XGBOOST model, supplemented by SHAP analysis, to assess the risk of thyroid nodules. PSM was utilized to balance baseline characteristic differences, thereby reducing bias. The XGBOOST model was then employed to predict risk factors, with model efficacy measured by the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). SHAP analysis helped quantify and explain the impact of each feature on the prediction outcomes, identifying key risk factors. Initially, 600 valid questionnaires from the WenJuanXing platform underwent PSM processing, resulting in a matched dataset of 96 cases for modeling analysis. The AUC value of the XGBOOST model reached 0.95, demonstrating high accuracy in differentiating thyroid nodule risks. SHAP analysis revealed age and daily Bluetooth headset usage duration as the two most significant factors affecting thyroid nodule risk. Specifically, longer daily usage durations of Bluetooth headsets were strongly linked to an increased risk of developing thyroid nodules, as indicated by the SHAP analysis outcomes. Our study highlighted a significant impact relationship between prolonged Bluetooth headset use and increased thyroid nodule risk, emphasizing the importance of considering health impacts in the use of modern technology, especially for devices like Bluetooth headsets that are frequently used daily. Through precise model predictions and variable importance analysis, our research provides a scientific basis for the formulation of public health policies and personal health habit choices, suggesting that attention should be paid to the duration of Bluetooth headset use in daily life to reduce the potential risk of thyroid nodules. Future research should further investigate the biological mechanisms of this relationship and consider additional potential influencing factors to offer more comprehensive health guidance and preventive measures.


Low-intensity microwave radiation can open the blood-brain barrier

In 1975, Allan Frey published a paper in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences which reported that exposure to low intensity microwave radiation could open the blood-brain barrier in rats. Moreover, pulsed radio frequency waves (like Bluetooth) were more likely to produce this effect than continuous waves. (3)

The blood-brain barrier is a special layer of cells in the brain that prevents chemical toxins in the blood system from reaching the brain. Breaching this barrier could potentially lead to neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative diseases and brain cancer.

More than a dozen peer-reviewed studies have replicated Frey's findings—exposure to low intensity microwave radiation can open the blood-brain barrier (see links below). (3)  

The effect of microwave radiation on the blood-brain barrier is nonlinear—it occurs with low intensity exposures but not at higher intensity exposures.

Although other published studies have failed to find the blood-brain barrier effect, these studies tended to use higher intensity exposures or employed small samples.

Recommendations

We may not be certain of the long-term risks of using Bluetooth devices, but why would anyone insert microwave-emitting devices in their ears near their brain when there are safer ways to use a cell phone?

I recommend the use of corded headsets or hands-free use of cell phones, not wireless earbuds. Moreover, one should never keep a cell phone next to your body, especially during a phone call, but also whenever the phone is powered on. For additional tips on how to reduce your exposure to wireless radiation see https://www.saferemr.com/2015/10/tips-to-reduce-your-wireless-radiation.html.

%%%
News coverage

In the past few days, numerous news stories have appeared citing industry-affiliated scientists who claim that AirPods are safe. Nonetheless, a few news reports have addressed the potential health risks from using AirPods:

·         CBS San Francisco: "Apple Unveils iPhone 7 Without Headphone Jack"
·         Daily Mail: “Could wireless headphones harm your health?”

Since the stories in the Daily Mail and CNN were posted on September 8, over two dozen online news stories have appeared that discuss the potential health risks from the microwave radiation emitted by AirPods.

References (updated 1/13/2025)

(1) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Wireless Headset. FCC ID: BCG-A1523. Model Name: A1523. Report Number: 16U23784-S6V1. Issue Date: 8/30/2016. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/document.php?id=3118442

(2) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Wireless Headset. FCC ID: BCG-A1722. Model Name: A1722. Report Number: 16U23784-S1V1. Issue Date: 8/30/2016. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/BCG-A1722/RF-Exposure-Info/16U23784-S1V1-FCC-SAR-Report-3118428.pdf

(3) 3 peer-reviewed studies that reported on the effects of brief exposure to Bluetooth radiation:

Zhou N, Qin W, Zhang JJ, Wang Y, Wen JS, Lim YM. Epidemiological exploration of the impact of bluetooth headset usage on thyroid nodules using Shapley additive explanations method. Sci Rep. 2024 Jun 21;14(1):14354. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-63653-0. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11192738/ 

Mandalà M, Colletti V, Sacchetto L, Manganotti P, Ramat S, Marcocci A, Colletti L. Effect of Bluetooth headset and mobile phone electromagnetic fields on the human auditory nerve. Laryngoscope. 2014 Jan;124(1):255-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23619813

Balachandran R, Prepageran N, Rahmat O, Zulkiflee AB, Hufaida KS. Effects of Bluetooth device electromagnetic field on hearing: pilot study. J Laryngol Otol. 2012 Apr;126(4):345-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22310164


(4) 16 peer-reviewed studies that reported significant evidence of opening of the blood-brain barrier from exposure to low-intensity microwave radiation:

Kizilçay AO, Tütüncü B, Koçarslan M, Gözel MA. Effects of 1800 MHz and 2100 MHz mobile phone radiation on the blood-brain barrier of New Zealand rabbits. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2024 Nov 16. doi: 10.1007/s11517-024-03238-1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39548043/ 

Sırav B, Seyhan N. Effects of GSM modulated radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation on permeability of blood-brain barrier in male & female rats. J Chem Neuroanat. 2016 Sep;75(Pt B):123-7  23. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26723545

Tang J, Zhang Y, Yang L, Chen Q, Tan L, Zuo S, Feng H, Chen Z, Zhu G. Exposure to 900MHz electromagnetic fields activates the mkp-1/ERK pathway and causes blood-brain barrier damage and cognitive impairment in rats. Brain Res. 2015 Jan 15. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25598203

Sirav B, Seyhan N. Effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure on blood-brain barrier permeability in male and female rats. Electromagn Biol Med. 2011 Dec;30(4):253-60. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22047463

Sirav B, Seyhan N. Blood-brain barrier disruption by continuous-wave radio frequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2009;28(2):215-22. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19811403

Nittby H, Brun A, Eberhardt J, Malmgren L, Persson BR, Salford LG. Increased blood-brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone. Pathophysiology. 2009 Aug;16(2-3):103-12. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19345073

Söderqvist F, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K, Hardell L. Exposure to an 890-MHz mobile phone-like signal and serum levels of S100B and transthyretin in volunteers. Toxicol Lett. 2009 Aug 25;189(1):63-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19427372

Eberhardt JL, Persson BR, Brun AE, Salford LG, Malmgren LO. Blood-brain barrier permeability and nerve cell damage in rat brain 14 and 28 days after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. Electromagn Biol Med. 2008;27(3):215-29. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18821198

Belyaev IY,  Koch CB, Terenius O, Roxström-Lindquist K, Malmgren LO, H Sommer W, Salford LG, Persson BR. Exposure of rat brain to 915 MHz GSM microwaves induces changes in gene expression but not double stranded DNA breaks or effects on chromatin conformation. Bioelectromagnetics. 2006 May;27(4):295-306. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16511873

Salford LG, Brun AE,  Eberhardt JL,  Malmgren L,  Persson BR. Nerve cell damage in mammalian brain after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. Environ Health Perspect. 2003 Jun;111(7):881-3; discussion A408. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12782486

Leszczynski D, Joenväärä S, Reivinen J, Kuokka R. Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: molecular mechanism for cancer- and blood-brain barrier-related effects. Differentiation. 2002 May;70(2-3):120-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12076339

Schirmacher A, Winters S, Fischer S, Goeke J, Galla HJ, Kullnick U, Ringelstein EB, Stögbauer F. Electromagnetic fields (1.8 GHz) increase the permeability to sucrose of the blood-brain barrier in vitro. Bioelectromagnetics. 2000 Jul;21(5):338-45. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10899769

Fritze K, Sommer C, Schmitz B, Mies G, Hossmann KA, Kiessling M, Wiessner C. Effect of global system for mobile communication (GSM) microwave exposure on blood-brain barrier permeability in rat. Acta Neuropathol. 1997 Nov;94(5):465-70. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9386779

Salford LG, Brun A, Sturesson K, Eberhardt JL, Persson BR. Permeability of the blood-brain barrier induced by 915 MHz electromagnetic radiation, continuous wave and modulated at 8, 16, 50, and 200 Hz. Microsc Res Tech. 1994 Apr 15;27(6):535-42. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8012056

Persson BR, Salford LG, Brun A, Eberhardt JL, Malmgren L. Increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier induced by magnetic and electromagnetic fields. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1992 Mar 31;649:356-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1580510

Frey AH, Feld SR, Frey B. Neural function and behavior: Defining the relationship. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 247: 433–439. 1975. 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/46734


Wednesday, September 7, 2016

iPhone 7 Models: Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) or RF Exposure

What are the SAR values for iPhone’s new smart phones? How should consumers use this information?

Be sure to read the latest 
about cell phone use.

Also see: "Do iPhones emit more radiation than 
Samsung Galaxy phones?"


Note: I recommend corded headsets or hands-free use of cell phones, not wireless ear buds. Moreover, one should never keep a cell phone next to your body, especially during a phone call, but also whenever the phone is powered on. For more information see my AirPods post.



According to test reports filed with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for the iPhone 7 (Model A1660: GSM and CDMA ) for cellular transmission is 1.10 watts per kilogram (w/kg) at the head, and 1.14 w/kg when worn on the body. The hotspot/Airplay SAR is 1.16 w/kg. The SAR for simultaneous transmission (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.49 w/kg at the head, 1.56 w/kg when worn on the body, and 1.56 w/kg when used as a hotspot. (1a)

The SAR for the  iPhone 7 (Model A1778: GSM, no CDMA) for cellular transmission is 1.19 watts per kilogram (w/kg) at the head, and 1.09 w/kg when worn on the body. The hotspot/Airplay SAR is 1.14 w/kg. The SAR for simultaneous transmission (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.56 w/kg at the head, 1.51 w/kg when worn on the body, and 1.58 w/kg when used as a hotspot. (1b)

The SAR for the iPhone 7 Plus (Model A1661: GSM and CDMA) for cellular transmission is 1.09 watts per kilogram (w/kg) at the head, and 1.10 w/kg when worn on the body. The hotspot/Airplay SAR is 1.13 w/kg. The SAR for simultaneous transmission (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.45 w/kg at the head, 1.51 w/kg when worn on the body, and 1.58 w/kg when used as a hotspot.  (2a) 

The SAR for the iPhone 7 Plus (Model A1784: GSM, no CDMA) for cellular transmission is 1.09 watts per kilogram (w/kg) at the head, and 1.14 w/kg when worn on the body. The hotspot/Airplay SAR is 1.14 w/kg. The SAR for simultaneous transmission (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.42 w/kg at the head, 1.54 w/kg when worn on the body, and 1.54 w/kg when used as a hotspot.  (2b) 

All SARs reported above are averaged over one gram of body tissue corresponding to the US standard. The SARs may vary depending upon your specific cell phone carrier (e.g., AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, or Verizon). 

The minimum separation distance for body-worn testing was 5 mm (about two-tenths of an inch).

The SARs for the Samsung Galaxy S7 and Note smart phones were obtained at a separation distance of 15 mm (about six-tenths of an inch) from the body so the body-worn SAR values are not comparable to those reported for the Apple iPhones. The iPhone SAR values can be found in my article about the Samsung smart phones.

The FCC ID number for the iPhone 7 is xx, and for the iPhone Plus it is xx. The SAR values for these smart phones will soon be available from Apple and from the FCC. 

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 harm 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 in the U.S. and other countries and exposure to cell phone radiation may be contributing to this increase. (17) In 2015 more than 220 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields and biology or health signed a petition, the International EMF Scientist Appeal, calling for stronger regulation of wireless radiation.

For tips on how to reduce exposure to wireless radiation, see "
Some Tips to Reduce Your 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).

References 

(1a) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Cellular Phone with Bluetooth and WLAN Radios. FCC ID: BCG-E3085A. Model Name: A1660, A1780. Prepared for Apple, Inc. Report Number: 16U23309-S1V8. Issue Date: 9/1/2016. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/document.php?id=3120702

(1b) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Cellular Phone with Bluetooth and WLAN Radios. FCC ID: BCG-E3091A. Model Name: A1778. Prepared for Apple, Inc. Report Number: 16U23338-S1V10. Issue Date: 9/1/2016. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/document.php?id=3120237

(2a) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Cellular Phone with Bluetooth and WLAN Radios. FCC ID: BCG-E3087A. Model Name: A1661, A1786. Prepared for Apple, Inc. Report Number: 16U23287-S1V8. Issue Date: 9/1/2016. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/document.php?id=3120239

(2b) UL Verification Services, Inc. SAR Evaluation Report for Cellular Phone with Bluetooth and WLAN Radios. FCC ID: BCG-E3092A. Model Name: A1784. Prepared for Apple, Inc. Report Number: 16U23366-S1V9. Issue Date: 9/1/2016. Fremont, CA. https://fccid.io/document.php?id=3120427

(3) FCC. Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Cellular Telephones. Undated. http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cellular-telephones

(4) FCC. “Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) For Cell Phones: What It Means For You.” Undated. http://www.fcc.gov/guides/specific-absorption-rate-sar-cell-phones-what-it-means-you

(5) Joel Moskowitz. “"Comments on the 2012 GAO Report: 'Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed'.:” http://www.saferemr.com/2013/01/commentary-gao-2012-report-on-mobile.html

(6) Wolchover N. Radiation Risk: Are Some Cellphones More Dangerous Than Others? Life's Little Mysteries. June 23, 2011. http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/1550-radiation-risk-some-cell-phones-more-dangerous-than-others.html

(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. http://www.icems.eu/papers.htm

(9) Joel Moskowitz. “LTE Cell Phone Radiation Affects Brain Activity in Cell Phone Users.” Sep 20, 2013. http://www.prlog.org/12215083

(10) Joel Moskowitz. “Brain Cancer Risk Increases with the Amount of Wireless Phone Use: Study. http://www.prlog.org/12216483

(11) Joel Moskowitz. “Most Significant Government Health Report on Mobile Phone Radiation Ever Published.” http://www.prlog.org/12125230

(12) Joel Moskowitz. “Cell Phone Radiation, Pregnancy, and Sperm.” Nov 19, 2012.     http://www.prlog.org/12026867

(13) Joel Moskowitz. “Cell Phone Use and Prenatal Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation May Cause Headaches in Children.“ http://www.prlog.org/12269207

(14) Joel Moskowitz. “Part I: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Key Testimony Submitted to the FCC.” Aug 4, 2014. http://www.saferemr.com/2014/08/why-we-need-stronger-cell-phone.html

(15) Joel Moskowitz. “Part II: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Key Research Papers Submitted to the FCC.” Aug 4, 2014. http://www.saferemr.com/2014/08/why-we-need-stronger-cell-phone_43.html

(16) Joel Moskowitz. “Part III: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--98 Scientific Experts Who Signed Resolutions.” Aug 4, 2014. http://www.saferemr.com/2014/08/why-we-need-stronger-cell-phone_4.html

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

(18) Joel Moskowitz. Some Tips to Reduce Your Exposure to Wireless Radiation  (one page handout). Undated. 
http://bit.ly/saferemrtips3