Welcome to Bennett's Study

From the Author of No Land an Island and Unconscionable

Pondering Alphabetic SOLUTIONS: Peace, Politics, Public Affairs, People Relations

http://www.bennettponderingpeacepoliticssolutions.com/

http://www.bennettponderingpeacepoliticssolutions.com/author/

http://www.bennettponderingpeacepoliticssolutions.com/buy/

UNCONSCIONABLE: http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/author/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/book/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/excerpt/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/contact/ http://www.unconscionableusforeignrelations.com/buy/ SearchTerm=Carolyn+LaDelle+Bennett http://www2.xlibris.com/books/webimages/wd/113472/buy.htm http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/08UNCONSCIONABLE/prweb12131656.htm http://bookstore.xlibris.com/AdvancedSearch/Default.aspx? http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-000757788/UNCONSCIONABLE.aspx

http://todaysinsight.blogspot.com

Friday, August 10, 2012

RF/Cell Phone hazard another example of Gov’t breakdown failing to provide for common defense, promote general welfare

GAO addresses Government failure to update and inform public on rising radio-frequency (RF), rising cell phone use and dangers to health
Excerpt and editing by Carolyn Bennett


This is some of what the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) said in its July 24, 2012, Report to Congressional Requesters “TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed.”

Sixteen-year Government failure
Cell phone use, radio-frequency exposure rose dramatically

“The Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) radio-frequency (RF) energy exposure limit may not reflect the latest research, and testing requirements may not identify maximum exposure in all possible usage conditions. 

”FCC set an RF energy exposure limit for mobile phones in 1996 [16 years ago], based on recommendations from federal health and safety agencies and international organizations.  

“These international organizations have updated their exposure limit recommendation in recent years, based on new research, and this new limit has been widely adopted by other countries, including countries in the European Union. 

“This new recommended limit could allow for more RF energy exposure, but actual exposure depends on a number of factors including how the phone is held during use. 

FCC has not adopted the new recommended limit.  

“The Office of Management and Budget’s instructions to federal agencies require the adoption of consensus standards when possible.  

FCC told GAO that it relies on the guidance of federal health and safety agencies when determining the RF energy exposure limit, and to date, none of these agencies have advised FCC to change the limit.  

However, FCC has not formally asked these agencies for a reassessment. By not formally reassessing its current limit, FCC cannot ensure it is using a limit that reflects the latest research on RF energy exposure.  

FCC has also not reassessed its testing requirements to ensure that they identify the maximum RF energy exposure a user could experience. Some consumers may use mobile phones against the body, which FCC does not currently test, and could result in RF energy exposure higher than the FCC limit. 

Sixteen-year plus lapse in promoting general welfare 
Risk: radio frequency exposure unchecked, uninformed, unregulated  

FCC developed its RF energy exposure limit based on input from federal health and safety agencies as well as the 1991 recommendation by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) that was subsequently approved and issued in 1992 by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) [2861 Fed. Reg. 41017, August, 7, 1996]. 
In 1996, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted the RF energy exposure limit for mobile phones of 1.6 watts per kilogram.
In 2006, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) published its updated recommendation for an RF energy exposure limit of 2.0 watts per kilogram, averaged over 10 grams of tissue.
This new recommended limit, the GAO said, “was harmonized with a 1998 recommendation of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, which has been adopted by more than 40 countries, including the European Union countries.” And though it “could allow for more RF energy exposure from mobile phone use,” … actual exposure depends on a number of factors: … the operating power of the phone, how the phone is held during use, and where it is used in proximity to a mobile phone base station.”


FCC inaction 

FCC officials told the GAO that the FCC “has not adopted any newer limit because federal health and safety agencies have not advised them to do so”; that the agency relies “heavily on the guidance and recommendations of federal health and safety agencies when determining the appropriate RF energy exposure limit and that, to date, none of these agencies have advised FCC that its current RF energy limit needs to be revised.  

Officials from Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) told GAO “that FCC has not formally asked either agency for an opinion on the RF energy limit.”  

U. S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommends 

That the Federal Communications Commission “formally reassess and, if appropriate, change its current RF energy exposure limit and mobile phone testing requirements related to likely usage configurations, particularly when phones are held against the body.”



Sources and notes

TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed, Report to Congressional Requesters, United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) Report to Congressional Requesters (GAO-12-771), July 2012,
http://gao.gov/assets/600/592901.pdf

Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed, GAO-12-771, Jul 24, 2012, http://gao.gov/products/GAO-12-771

GAO Found: “Scientific research to date has not demonstrated adverse human health effects of exposure to radio-frequency (RF) energy from mobile phone use, but research is ongoing that may increase understanding of any possible effects. In addition, officials from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as well as experts GAO interviewed have reached similar conclusions about the scientific research. Ongoing research examining the health effects of RF energy exposure is funded and supported by federal agencies, international organizations, and the mobile phone industry. NIH is the only federal agency GAO interviewed directly funding studies in this area, but other agencies support research under way by collaborating with NIH or other organizations to conduct studies and identify areas for additional research.”

Abbreviations 

ANSI American National Standards Institute
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
DNA deoxyribonucleic acid
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FCC Federal Communications Commission
FDA Food and Drug Administration
IARC International Agency for Research on Cancer
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
NIH National Institutes of Health
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
RF radio frequency
SAR specific absorption rate
TCB Telecommunication Certification Body

__________________________________

Bennett's books are available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY] • See also: World Pulse: Global Issues through the eyes of Women: http://www.worldpulse.com/ http://www.worldpulse.com/pulsewire http://www.facebook.com/#!/bennetts2ndstudy

__________________________________

No comments:

Post a Comment