Feeds

DTI and Which? at odds over phone safety

The Reg wonders who to trust

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile

Consumers have been left without a clue - should they go hands-free or clamp their mobile phone to their ear?

Research published by the government today indicates that hands-free mobile phone kits are safe to use. These new findings appear to totally contradict a recent report from Which?, the consumers association magazine.

However, the two opposing views could be a result of nothing more than a dispute over methodology. One group of researchers measured the amount of radiation emitted by the phones, while the other measured radiation absorbed by the body, while using the phone.

The Consumers Association (CA) said that it was not convinced that specific absorption of radiation (SAR) test was reliable or safe. Helen Parker, the editor of Which? said: "We stand by our original test results published earlier this year. We think there are problems with current SAR testing for hands free kits and we are carrying out more research into this area."

So who is to be believed? A spokeswoman for the DTI said that it was not the department's place to comment on other people's research, and that its findings showed all the absorption levels were within the safe parameters set by the National Radiological Protection Board. The whole report can be found here.

Meanwhile, the CA says that there is no standard SAR test, and that results vary widely from laboratory to laboratory. The DTI says that since this experiment compared SAR levels without and then with a hands free kit in the same lab, the results are indeed reliable.

It is difficult to know who to trust since both groups have strong motives to keep the debate running. The CA wants to sell more reports and the government stands to make a handsome wedge from the sale of mobile phone licences.

There is more information available than ever before on the safety of mobile phones, but it is often contradictory, and little help to the end users who need to make the risk assessment for themselves. The most sensible thing The Reg has heard in the debate is the suggestion that until there is clearer information, calls should be kept short. ®

Related Stories

My head hurts and I want $800 million
30 million Brits have a mobile phone
WHO doctors clear mobile phones of cancer risk

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

More from The Register

next story
Ellison: Sparc M7 is Oracle's most important silicon EVER
'Acceleration engines' key to performance, security, Larry says
Oracle SHELLSHOCKER - data titan lists unpatchables
Database kingpin lists 32 products that can't be patched (yet) as GNU fixes second vuln
Lenovo to finish $2.1bn IBM x86 server gobble in October
A lighter snack than expected – but what's a few $100m between friends, eh?
Ello? ello? ello?: Facebook challenger in DDoS KNOCKOUT
Gets back up again after half an hour though
Hey, what's a STORAGE company doing working on Internet-of-Cars?
Boo - it's not a terabyte car, it's just predictive maintenance and that
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
The next step in data security
With recent increased privacy concerns and computers becoming more powerful, the chance of hackers being able to crack smaller-sized RSA keys increases.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.