Safety of mobile device radio transmissions on physiology investigated.

[elte]

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2016-08-5g.html

In 2013, the FCC opened a formal inquiry into whether it needed to reassess its exposure limits. That proceeding remains open, the agency said.
"Scientific evidence always informs FCC rules on this matter," said spokesman Neil Grace. "We will continue to follow all recommendations from federal health and safety experts including whether the FCC should modify its current policies and RF exposure limits."
The FDA said it "believes that the weight of scientific evidence does not show an association between exposure to radiofrequency from cellphones and adverse health outcomes." But that agency said more research is needed.
In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is part of the World Health Organization, classified cellphone radiation as "possibly carcinogenic to humans." There are 288 other "agents" with that classification, including many chemicals as well as talc-based body powder and traditional Asian pickled vegetables.
The organization said research at the time was limited, and it did not classify the radiofrequency radiation as cancer-causing or probably cancer-causing.  

[C C]

A dozen years ago and probably well before that they were handing out confident research claims that cell phones were safe. That they're hedging a bit now but still propping up the dam just echoes the same old underlying problem of: "What could be done even if they were hazardous? Why cross that line and make manufacturers, retailers, and consumers as angry at us as a confiscation of guns in America?"

There's a whole generation that's grown up so addicted to assorted mobile devices that asking them to either give them up or curb usage would be as successful as asking them to amputate a native body appendage. The older folks who initially laughed at the things have become enslaved to them just short of that.

[stryder]

Bean Counting

This is one of the main problems of any technological development that doesn't observe it's potential repercussions or impact. At the root of Mobile phones and Radiofrequency is an industry funded by people that want to make money. While it might be advertised as "Free-wifi in third-world countries" and push the trend of brandnaming and "necessity through accessory".

One of the main considerations by such unscrupulous capitalists is how much of a return and how quickly.

A "Bean Counter" might emphasise that some technologies are new, untested and potentially dangerous, however if they throw in with scientific review exercising caution and waiting years for results the very market they try to dominate might be overshadowed by a bigger corporation that cut all those corners, which basically means their concern is more about their market share than the damage they might do.

A bean counter would point out that rather than the damaging costs of all those corners, red-tape and testing/review, it makes more sense to make the money and just deal with the financial consequences should the impacts be proven by a third-party (who they didn't fund) and this is where the corporate lawyers would start identify settlement packages (at a far reduced value from what they are actually worth).

That unfortunately is the harsh reality of big businesses and how they walk all over the little guy.