News

Apple AirPods

AirPods: Are Apple’s New Wireless Earbuds Safe?

The third generation of Apple’s AirPods (aka AirPods 3) was introduced in 2021 and emit Bluetooth microwave or radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in the 2.402 – 2.480 GHz frequency range to communicate with a smart phone or other wireless device.

In the 1980s of course there were concerns about over-ear Sony Walkman headphones, and then about the ‘In ear’ headphones. With some justification the latter, when loud volume with no attenuation by distance or air was a predominant feature – and yes there were harms. These were acoustic mechanical waves however, with very different qualities to pulse modulated electromagnetic radiation.

AirPods have a SAR (specific absorption of radiation by tissue) rating of 0.626 W/kg, the ‘safe’ limit for phones is 2 W/kg.  Remember that this is only an assessment of thermal effects, the ability to heat up tissue.  It is the biological effects at non thermal levels of radiation that are of concern. 

The microwave field strength measured next to the ear with an Airpod functioning can reach 15 V/m. This unit V/m is another that measures ‘power’.  An iPhone in a pocket typically pulses 15 to 30 V/m.

The UK ‘safe’ thermal exposure limit is 60 V/m (averaged over 6mins), but these guidelines set by the ICNIRP are incomplete and have been found untenable in court.  Organisations that advocate for safer non thermal limits advocate down to 1-2 V/m as possibly safe.

Note that whereas phones may be in use for 20-40mins at a time, an Airpod is often kept in the ears for hours at a time, and so the cumulative exposure is substantial.

There are 100s of credible studies that show that biological systems suffer from adaptive stress when exposed to chronic levels of RFR, therefore should we not consider that transmitting and receiving pulsed microwave signals inside the ears, either side of the brain, is probably not at all sensible ?

Whilst long term effects and actual mechanisms are being studied we would suggest that a Precautionary Approach to the use of Airpods would be sensible – i.e  use for short periods and never go to sleep with them in. Turn all devices onto Airplane/Off at night.


For further reading :  https://www.saferemr.com/2016/09/airpods-are-apples-new-wireless-earbuds.html

https://ehtrust.org/airpods-facts-health-effects-of-wireless-radiation-to-the-brain/

November News

Calls for a smartphone free childhood, and no mobiles in UK schools, has been quite a theme this year. The campaigns focus on mental health and addiction of course, but provide a fair wind for gradually raising awareness of the radiation dangers as well. Under ‘Health and Research’ below we have new articles on the topic of smartphones and children.

From Tim Arnolds substack: “A Parent Pact has gathered signatures representing 72,697 children across over 9,602 schools who advocate for smartphone-free schooling. Spearheaded by the Smartphone-Free Childhood movement and based on the original pact by Hannah Oertel’s Delay Smartphones group, this initiative is a testament to where our digital norms are heading.


Recent blogs:

https://rfinfo.co.uk/campaign-successes/

https://rfinfo.co.uk/multi-photon-excitation/

SIGN UP TO NEWSLETTER

Mast Applications

•Take action steps on RFinfo: UPDATED Template Letter Step2: rfinfo.co.uk/mast-objection/

•New portal for Mast planning application comments – ‘Esthers list’ August 2024.


Environment

Data Centers in Ireland Overtake All Urban Electricity Use Combined

As the market demand for this new ‘fast and effective’ communication technology is expected to expand exponentially in the near future, we face a very realistic question: “Where are we going to generate all of this energy simply to transport and store data?” 5G and the fast connectivity technologies are promoted as more efficient and energy saving. But how environmentally friendly will this be with exponentially increasing and widespread use?

Residents object to ‘ridiculous’ plans Wi-Fi masts on Sussex beach


Health and Research

Circadian Reboot – E19 Dr. Magda Havas Reveals the Health Risks of EMFs

The glaring omission in the smartphones and children debate. Daily Sceptic UK.

Effects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: Thirty years of research. Moskowitz

It’s Okay To Be Off-Grid If You’re A Kid. Tim Arnold Substack

The Movement You’ve Missed: Smartphone Free Childhood

Bad connection: Study links cellphone radiation to brain cancer

Wireless technologies, non- ionizing electromagnetic fields and children: Identifying and reducing health risks

Jonathan Haidt: Smartphones vs. Smart Kids. National summit on education. 52mins youtube.

New Clues on Colorectal Cancer Among Young Adults Higher Risks When Cell Phone Is Carried Below the Waist

Washington Post Shines Light on What Modern Life Is Like for People With Electromagnetic Sensitivity. CHD – USA.

For a Growing Number of Kids, Back to School Means No Cellphones. CHD – USA.


Legal and Resistance

The Safer Phones Bill: by Josh MacAlister OBE MP. A Bill to make smartphones less addictive to support healthier, happier childhoods

Stephen Fry, Chrissie Hynde and Sophie Winkleman sign letter protesting 5G advertising on the Tube. The message, which is spearheaded by musician and Save Soho founder Tim Arnold, warns of the “potential dangers” of this advertisement. “As parents and health professionals campaign worldwide to protect their children from the numerous harms associated with smartphone apps, your administration is normalising the pervasive technology they’re fighting against,” it says.

SUPER CONNECTED – the movie, COMING TO SCHOOLS, UNIVERSITIES AND THEATRES IN 2025

Conference on exposure of children to wireless radiation in schools

Key document of credible expert evidence countering the ‘thermal dogma’ : ICBE-EMF: Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G


Technical

First transparent 5G antennas

Hypothesis on how to measure electromagnetic hypersensitivity


As a thought experiment: if you could buy a house next to a new 4G/5G mast or on a site with no mast nearby, which would you choose ?

Typically people take the precautionary approach …

Occasionally someone with skin in the economic ‘imperative’ of a ‘smart society’ will choose the one with a mast, maybe to make a point ;))