Cellphone makers do not want you to think about radiation when you go out to buy a new handset. It might make the retail experience a little less pleasurable.
That looks like the motivation behind a lawsuit filed on Friday in San Francisco to try to prevent disclosure of phone radiation levels on product packaging – something required by that city’s new ordinance. San Francisco’s move was the first of its kind in the US, so the mobile industry has decided to take a stand.
But what possible legal argument could there be for preventing point-of-sale disclosure of phone radiation levels?
Because the information might be “confusing”.
The CTIA – the US mobile industry trade group behind the lawsuit – says radiation levels, known as SAR values, are already published in other places. And since every phone must pass a Federal Communications Commission safety test, why could you possibly want to know what the actual radiation output is? By definition, all handsets are equally safe, so buyers could be misled.
But if that’s the case, why disclose each phone’s radiation level at all? The FCC thinks this information is important enough that it points consumers to the SAR levels of individual phones from its own website.
Some cellphone buyers would probably like to know that the Motorola V120C has a SAR value of 1.55 – not far off the maximum 1.6 permitted by the FCC. And their minds might not be put completely at ease by the CTIA’s assurance that the regulator “monitors scientific research on a regular basis” to make sure its safety rules are still adequate.
Then again, who can blame the cellphone makers for trying? Ingredient labelling has taken half the fun out of buying many a delicious snack – and they would rather their fancy gadgets don’t meet the same fate.
