TOCA RF Check
Radiation and SAR
The purpose of this page is to educate anyone interested in learning more about SAR. The aim is to encourage a more conscious use of technology, not to discourage its use.
The sources of radiation
Radiation sources fall into two main categories: natural and man-made. Radiation has always been a natural part of the environment.
Man-made radiation has been emitted for about 150 years since the industrial revolution. Artificial sources are claimed to be responsible for about 15% of total exposure. In industrialized countries, this share may reach 50% due to more widespread access to technology.
Medicine 14%, Nuclear industry 1%
Radon 42%, Buildings/Soil 18%, Cosmic 14%, Food/Water 11%
Source of radiation (2016)
The electromagnetic spectrum
Based on frequency or wavelength, electromagnetic radiation is categorized using the electromagnetic spectrum.
Non-ionizing radiation sits at the low end of the electromagnetic spectrum. It does not carry enough energy to break molecular bonds or ionize atoms. That said, extended exposure to non-ionizing radiation is not without risk.
UV radiation in small doses helps the body produce vitamin D. Too much causes damage at the molecular level. Sunlight reaching Earth is mostly non-ionizing: the atmosphere filters out ionizing far-ultraviolet rays via gases such as oxygen.
The Specific Absorption Rate value
SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) is the amount of absorbed non-ionizing radiation power per unit mass of biological tissue, expressed in W/kg. Every phone has a certified SAR value.
That value can be found in the device user manual, in the phone's settings, or in an online SAR database. Just as food is labelled with nutritional information, phones carry RF exposure warnings. All phones contain information advising against keeping the device in direct contact with the head or body.
Manufacturers measure SAR under laboratory conditions that often do not reflect real-world use. This is why manufacturers advise using the phone at a distance from the head or body. The lower the SAR value, the better.
Definition
Specific Absorption Rate (SAR)
The rate at which energy is absorbed per unit mass of body tissue when exposed to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields.
Unit: W/kg (watts per kilogram of tissue)
SAR measurements and limits
SAR level standards appeared quite recently
For a long time there were no established standards for SAR across the mobile phone industry because there was no governmental requirement. In the US, the FCC set radio frequency safety guidelines that all phones must meet before being sold (1992).
In Europe, the European Council Recommendation 519/1999/EC adopted the recommendations of the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP Guidelines 1998). Current reference standards and limits are shown below.
United States
1.6 W/kg
Per 1 gram of tissue
FCC Guidelines
ANSI C95.1 (1992)
Europe
2.0 W/kg
Per 10 grams of tissue
European Spec. ES 59005
ICNIRP Guidelines 1998
Australia
1.6 W/kg
Per 1 gram of tissue
ACA Standard
AS/NZS 2772.1 (1999)
TOCA RF Check exposure tiers
The RF Check tool classifies phones into three tiers based on EU body SAR (W/kg over 10g of tissue).
Low
< 0.6 W/kg
Well below the legal limit. Minimal absorption under typical use.
Medium
0.6 – 1.0 W/kg
Within the safe range. Consider carry distance and usage habits.
High
> 1.0 W/kg
Over half the legal limit. Body exposure is a relevant factor.
How SAR is measured
The phantom model
A liquid simulating the electrical properties of human tissue is filled into a SAM (Specific Anthropomorphic Mannequin). The electric field from the phone under test is scanned inside the SAM with a miniature probe. The test covers at least four phone positions: right and left sides of the head at tilt and cheek positions, to find the maximum SAR across all operating frequency bands.
Frequency-dependent fluids
The phantom fluids simulate the RF absorption characteristics of human tissue. They are frequency-dependent: a fluid for 1800 MHz differs from one used at 900 MHz. This is why SAR scales vary between the USA and the EU, due to slightly different measurement methods.
Measurement standards evolve to reflect real use
Previously, the phone was placed at 15–25 mm from the phantom during testing. This did not reflect how most people hold a phone. The standard was updated to 5 mm, more closely matching typical use against the ear.
Each phone is designed to use the minimum power required to reach the network. The actual SAR during use should therefore sit below the certified maximum value.
Radiation is everywhere
Natural radiation has always been part of our environment. The amount of man-made radiation we are exposed to has grown rapidly in recent decades, driven by the ever-increasing number of technological devices we surround ourselves with.
Global mobile subscriptions since 1998
Mobile phones are the most widely used electronic device worldwide. Mobile internet overtook desktop usage in 2014. We tend to keep our phones close to our bodies for extended periods, usually in our pockets.
Technology is closer to us than ever before. Our homes and streets are flooded with electromagnetic fields generated by devices. It is possible that prolonged, close contact with these devices may affect us negatively.
Phone / WiFi
2.45 GHz
Laptop
10 MHz
Router
5 GHz
Power lines
50 Hz
Technology has moved forward faster than safety standards
SAR limits for phones were set in 1993, when fewer than 10% of the population used them. The standard was established at a time of almost no data transmission. When testing SAR compliance today, all data transmissions are still turned off during measurement.
Most manufacturers focus on building thinner, faster phones without accounting for SAR values or the potential health impact on their customers.
Some inventions took decades to prove harmful
It is worth remembering that some widely used technologies throughout history took researchers decades to prove their harmful impact.
1920s
Shoe-fitting fluoroscopes invented and installed in shoe stores. Using X-ray to find the perfect fit was considered normal practice.
1927
First scientific concerns about X-ray exposure are raised, but widespread use continues for decades.
1950s
Studies begin linking shoe fluoroscopes to skin diseases in store workers. Evidence of harm accumulates slowly.
1970s
Shoe fluoroscopes are banned in most countries. Decades passed between widespread adoption and regulatory action.
As we become ever more reliant on our devices, what was once considered excessive smartphone use has been normalized. Growing concern among researchers and the public about the potentially harmful effects of mobile radiation demands that more research be done.
Why reducing EMF exposure matters
Why should you care?
There is a growing concern among researchers and the general public about the potentially harmful effects mobile radiation can have on our health. Evidence and research in this area exists, but there is a demand for more as some people still remain unconvinced.
Health implications
Research found preliminary evidence suggesting that RF-EMF may affect brain functions such as figural memory in regions most exposed during mobile phone use. Children are more vulnerable than adults when it comes to EMF exposure.
In 2011, the World Health Organisation classified EMF as a possible carcinogen.
Independent scientists based their finding on studies of cancer in humans and animals, as well as other relevant data. An international scientific appeal was also created, calling for protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure.
Scientists concerned with the dangers of EMF radiation made the following requests:
Financial transparency
Media should disclose experts' financial relationships with industry when citing opinions on the health and safety of EMF-emitting technologies.
Better regulations
Guidelines and regulatory standards should be strengthened. Warning labels on phones should be required to keep consumers informed of possible side effects.
Public awareness
The public should be fully informed about potential health risks from electromagnetic energy and taught harm reduction strategies.
Research
Governments should fund independent research on electromagnetic fields and health, and mandate industry cooperation with researchers.
Medical training
Medical professionals should be educated about the biological effects of electromagnetic energy and trained to treat patients with electromagnetic sensitivity.
Healthier electricity
Utilities responsible for generation and distribution of electricity should maintain adequate power quality and minimize harmful ground currents.
Radiation-free areas
Radiation-free zones should be established for electro-hypersensitive people: no WiFi routers, smart meters, or cell towers in these areas.
Protection
Children and pregnant women should receive the highest level of protection. Children are scientifically shown to be at higher risk from adverse health effects of radiation.
Healthier products
Manufacturers should be encouraged to develop safer technology. In many countries it is considered important to protect schools and kindergartens from harmful WiFi radiation.
What the research shows
Extensive scientific research has been carried out on EMF health effects. The degree of risk depends on the length and intensity of exposure. Much of the research is inconclusive, but some studies show correlations between EMF exposure and health outcomes.
1,670 peer-reviewed EMF papers (1979–2018), mobile and cordless phone category
NTP animal study
The National Toxicology Program found that animals exposed to radiation were more likely to develop brain tumours. The risk increase was small, but notable given the rarity of these tumours.
Fertility
Multiple studies found that sperm exposed to mobile phone radiation died 3–4 times faster than unexposed samples, suggesting a possible link to male infertility.
Glioma risk
A Canadian study found that approximately 550 lifetime hours of phone use may slightly increase the risk of developing glioma.
GERoNiMO Project
An EU-funded study (grant 603794) led by ISGlobal with 19 partners from 13 countries, integrating research, risk assessment, and risk management on EMF exposure.
RF-EMF and adolescent brain development
A Swiss TPH / GERoNiMO study found that cumulative RF-EMF brain exposure over one year may negatively affect figural memory performance in adolescents. Findings are preliminary and require confirmation.
Other reported health associations include: brain tumours, Alzheimer's disease, speech problems, reduced melatonin production, leukemia, and increased brain-blood barrier permeability. Research in these areas is ongoing.
Who should be especially careful
The evidence presented on this page applies to everyone. Certain groups may need to take extra precautions when it comes to limiting electromagnetic radiation exposure.
Children
Children's bodies are still developing. Electromagnetic radiation penetrates the brains of children more deeply than adults, due to higher tissue water content and thinner skulls. Belgium and France have banned phones marketed to children. Taiwan may fine parents for letting children under two use electronic devices.
Pregnant women
Research suggests that maternal mobile phone use during pregnancy may be associated with an increased risk of speech problems, emotional issues, and behavioural problems including hyperactivity in the developing child.
People with chronic illness
People with chronic conditions may be more sensitive to environmental factors including EMF. Stress from EMF sensitivity may raise cortisol levels, reducing the body's ability to manage inflammation. Listing SAR values helps these individuals make informed choices.
Limiting exposure does not require stopping technology use
Attempting to remove all electronic devices from your life is not a good idea, and it would be quite difficult. There is no need to drastically change your lifestyle. Small, consistent habits are enough to feel more in control of your exposure.
It makes sense to limit EMF exposure where possible.
It requires little effort and there are many indications that it may be beneficial. If you ask a doctor about the root cause of an illness such as cancer, there is rarely a clear answer. It is usually a culmination of genetic and environmental factors. Awareness and caution cost nothing.
Check your phone's SAR value
Search over 1,000 phones in the TOCA RF Check database.
References (47)
1. Siemens Healthcare GmbH (2018) Radiation Sources — siemens-healthineers.com
2. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2008) Natural Background Sources — nrc.gov
3. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2011) Natural and Man-Made Radiation Sources — nrc.gov
4. Siemens Healthcare GmbH (2018) Radiation Sources — siemens-healthineers.com
5. Medical Radiation (2012) Man-made radiation — nrc.gov
6. Environmental Health Trust — Database Of Worldwide Policies On Cell Phones, Wireless And Health — ehtrust.org
7. RF Safe — Lowest radiation cell phones sold in USA — rfsafe.com
8. Hamada, L. et al. (2009) The Specific Absorption Rate of Mobile Phones Measured in a Flat Phantom and in the Standardized Human Head Phantom — jstage.jst.go.jp
9. EMF Explained 2.0 — SAR Explained
10. Samsung (2018) Check the SAR value: SM-A530F/DS — samsung.com
11. Environmental Health Trust — SAR Of Cell Phones — ehtrust.org
12. WHO / IARC (2011) IARC classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans — iarc.who.int
13. West, J.G. et al. (2013) Multifocal Breast Cancer in Young Women with Prolonged Contact between Their Breasts and Their Cellular Phones — hindawi.com
14. National Toxicology Program (2018) Peer Review of the Draft NTP Technical Reports on Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation — ntp.niehs.nih.gov
15. Gorpinchenko, I. (2014) The influence of direct mobile phone radiation on sperm quality — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
16. ISGlobal (2014–2018) GERoNiMO Project (EU grant 603794) — isglobal.org
17. Momoli, F. et al. (2017) Probabilistic Multiple-Bias Modelling Applied to the Canadian Data From the INTERPHONE Study — academic.oup.com
18. Zalata, A. et al. (2015) In vitro effect of cell phone radiation on motility, DNA fragmentation and clusterin gene expression in human sperm — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
19. Gorpinchenko, I. et al. (2014) The influence of direct mobile phone radiation on sperm quality. Central European Journal of Urology, 67(1), 65–71 — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
20. BioInitiative (2012) Electromagnetic Field Exposure Effects on Fertility and Reproduction — bioinitiative.org
21. Hardell, L., Mild, K.H., & Carlberg, M. (2003) Further aspects on cellular and cordless telephones and brain tumours. International Journal of Oncology, 22, 399–407 — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
22. Probabilistic Multiple-Bias Modeling Applied to the Canadian Data From the Interphone Study — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
23. Hardell, L. et al. (2013) Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma — pathophysiologyjournal.com
24. Yang, M. et al. (2017) Mobile phone use and glioma risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis — journals.plos.org
25. Zhang, X. et al. (2016) Microwaves and Alzheimer's disease. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 12(4), 1969–1972 — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
26. BioInitiative (2012) Electromagnetic Field Exposure Effects (ELF-EMF and RFR) on Fertility and Reproduction — bioinitiative.org
27. Zarei, S.I. et al. (2019) Mother's Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields before and during Pregnancy is Associated with Risk of Speech Problems in Offspring — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
28. Sangün, Ö. & Dündar, B. (2015) The Effects of Electromagnetic Field on the Endocrine System in Children and Adolescents — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
29. Yakymenko, I. et al. (2011) Long-term exposure to microwave radiation provokes cancer growth — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
30. H. Nittby et al. (2009) Increased blood-brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
31. Swiss TPH (2018) Mobile phone radiation may affect memory performance in adolescents — swisstph.ch
32. Hardell, L. et al. (2012) Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma — pathophysiologyjournal.com
33. Davis, D.L. et al. (2013) Swedish review strengthens grounds for concluding that radiation from cellular and cordless phones is a probable human carcinogen — pathophysiologyjournal.com
34. Hardell, L. (2017) Effects of Mobile Phones on Children's and Adolescents' Health: A Commentary — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
35. Health Belgium (2014) New rules for selling mobile phones — health.belgium.be
36. Legifrance.gouv.fr (2010) Portant engagement national pour l'environnement — legifrance.gouv.fr
37. Dolasia, M. (2015) Taiwan's New Law Imposes Fines On Parents That Allow Kids To Spend "Excessive" Time On Electronic Devices — dogonews.com
38. Assemblée Nationale (2014) Loi relative à la sobriété, transparence et concertation en matière d'exposition aux ondes électromagnétiques — legifrance.gouv.fr
39. Ministry of Environmental Protection Israel (2012) Radiation from Cellphones — gov.il
40. Hindustan Times — New mobile tower policy cleared (India) — hindustantimes.com
41. Under Secretary of Telecommunications (2012) Torres Law (Chile) — subtel.gob.cl
42. Hansen, F. (2017) How Does Stress Affect Your Immune System? — pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
43. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2011) Natural and Man-Made Radiation Sources — nrc.gov
44. Nuclear Regulatory Commission — Natural Background Sources — nrc.gov
45. Mobile Marketer — Mobile phone ranked most used electronic device — mobilemarketingmagazine.com
46. Environmental Health Trust — Database Of Worldwide Policies On Cell Phones, Wireless And Health — ehtrust.org
47. Environmental Health Trust — SAR of Cell Phones: Specific Absorption Rate — ehtrust.org
EU standard: ICNIRP Guidelines 1998/2020. US standard: FCC OET Bulletin 65, Supplement C. Australian standard: AS/NZS 2772.1 (ACA RS 1999).