Annex A - Group Research Proposal



Group Project Proposal (Science)
SCHOOL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, SINGAPORE
INVESTIGATIVE SKILLS IN SCIENCE
Names: Sophia, Shanice, Ria, MinQuan
Class: S2-01
Group Reference: C
1.    Indicate the type of research that you are adopting:


[ ] Test a hypothesis: Hypothesis-driven research
e.g. Investigation of the anti-bacterial effect of chrysanthemum


[ ] Measure a value: Experimental research (I)
e.g. Determination of the mass of Jupiter using planetary photography


[ ] Measure a function or relationship: Experimental research (II)
e.g. Investigation of the effect of temperature on the growth of crystals


[ ] Construct a model: Theoretical sciences and applied mathematics
e.g. Modeling of the cooling curve of naphthalene


[    X    ] Observational and exploratory research
e.g. Investigation of the soil quality in School of Science and Technology, Singapore  


[ ] Improve a product or process: Industrial and applied research
e.g. Development of a SMART and GREEN energy system for households  


2.    Write a research proposal of your interested topic in the following format:


Title: Investigation on the amount of voltage from different brands of cell phones before, after and when they are called


Introduction:
Our project is about the voltage given out by smartphones and old phones. Nowadays, people use cellphones and bring cellphones around with them every second, every moment. Therefore this research will be very useful for our generation as it plays a big role in our lives. We do not know which part of the phone gives out the most voltage, therefore we will take it as the speaker of the phone. We will vary the brand of phones (Samsung, iPhone, Sony, XiaoMi, Nokia). The project will be done using multiple equipments and a series of steps.

A.    Questions being addressed


  1. What is EMR? What are the causes and effects of EMR?
  2. What is voltage? How is it being related to EMR?
  3. What are the possible health hazards of electromagnetic radiation (EMR)?
  4. What are the effects of EMR on humans?
  5. What research has been done on this subject?
  6. Do different brands release different amounts of EMR?
  7. Does EMR affect the caller and the receiver?
  8. Which phone is most harmful in terms of voltage when called and when not being used?


What we found out:


  • At the start of 2014, 798 million handphones ran Android, 294 million ran Apple’s iOS, and 45 million ran Windows Phone, according to a new study by ABI Research.


  • The ABI study factors in an annual smartphone growth rate of 44 percent for 2013, (which is slightly down from 2012’s 45 percent). ABI also predicted that 20 million BlackBerry 10 phones would be in active use by December 2013.


  • Cell phones emit radiofrequency energy, a non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, which can be absorbed by tissues closest to where the phone is held.
  • Radiofrequency energy does not cause DNA damage in cells. It has not been found to cause cancer in animals or enhance cancer-causing effects of known chemical carcinogens in animals.


  • The amount of radiofrequency energy a cell phone user is exposed to depends on the technology of the phone, distance between the phone’s antenna and the user, extent and type of use, and user’s distance from cell phone towers.


  • Studies have not shown a consistent link between cell phone use and cancers of the brain, nerves, or other tissues of the head or neck. More research is needed as cell phone technology and how people use cell phones has been changing rapidly.


  • As of 2010, there were more than 303 million subscribers to cell phone service in the United States, according to the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association. This is a nearly threefold increase from the 110 million users in 2000. The number of global cell phone subscriptions estimated by the International Telecommunications Union is 5 billion.


  • Over time, the number of cell phone calls per day, the length of each call and the amount of time people use cell phones has increased and cell phone technology has undergone changes.


Summary of different other studies conducted:
  • The Interphone Study, conducted by a consortium of researchers from 13 countries, is the largest health-related case-control study of use of cellphones and head and neck tumors. Most published analyses from this study have shown no statistically significant increases in brain or central nervous system cancers related to higher amounts of cell phone use. One recent analysis showed a statistically significant, albeit modest, increase in the risk of glioma among the small proportion of study participants who spent the most total time on cell phone calls. However, the researchers considered this finding inconclusive because they felt that the amount of use reported by some respondents was unlikely and because the participants who reported lower levels of use appeared to have a slightly reduced risk of brain cancer compared with people who did not use cell phones regularly. Another recent study from the group found no relationship between brain tumor locations and regions of the brain that were exposed to the highest level of radiofrequency energy from cell phones.
Cardis E, Richardson L, Deltour I, et al. The INTERPHONE study: design, epidemiological methods, and description of the study population. European Journal of Epidemiology 2007; 22(9):647–664. [PubMed Abstract]
International Agency for Research on Cancer (2008). INTERPHONE Study: latest results update—8 October 2008 Exit Disclaimer. Lyon, France. Retrieved June 18, 2012.
The INTERPHONE Study Group. Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study. International Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 39(3):675–694. [PubMed Abstract]
Larjavaara S, Schüz J, Swerdlow A, et al. Location of gliomas in relation to mobile telephone use: a case-case and case-specular analysis. American Journal of Epidemiology 2011; 174(1):2–11.[PubMed Abstract]


  • A cohort study in Denmark linked billing information from more than 358,000 cell phone subscribers with brain tumor incidence data from the Danish Cancer Registry. The analyses found no association between cell phone use and the incidence of glioma, meningioma, or acoustic neuroma, even among people who had been cell phone subscribers for 13 or more years.
Johansen C, Boice J Jr, McLaughlin J, Olsen J. Cellular telephones and cancer: a nationwide cohort study in Denmark. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2001; 93(3):203–207. [PubMed Abstract]
Schüz J, Jacobsen R, Olsen JH, et al. Cellular telephone use and cancer risk: update of a nationwide Danish cohort. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2006; 98(23):1707–1713.[PubMed Abstract]
Frei P, Poulsen AH, Johansen C, et al. Use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumours: update of Danish cohort study. British Medical Journal 2011; 343:d6387. [PubMed Abstract]


  • The prospective Million Women Study in the United Kingdom found that self-reported cell phone use was not associated with an increased risk of glioma, meningioma, or non-central nervous system tumors. The researchers did find that the use of cell phones for more than 5 years was associated with an increased risk of acoustic neuroma, and that the risk of acoustic neuroma increased with increasing duration of cell phone use. However, the incidence of these tumors among men and women in the United Kingdom did not increase during 1998 to 2008, even though cell phone use increased dramatically over that decade.
Benson VS, Pirie K, Schüz J, et al. Mobile phone use and risk of brain neoplasms and other cancers: Prospective study. International Journal of Epidemiology 2013; First published online:May 8, 2013. doi:10.1093/ije/dyt072 Exit Disclaimer


  • An early case-control study in the United States was unable to demonstrate a relationship between cell phone use and glioma or meningioma.
Muscat JE, Malkin MG, Thompson S, et al. Handheld cellular telephone use and risk of brain cancer. JAMA 2000; 284(23):3001–3007. [PubMed Abstract]


  • Some case-control studies in Sweden found statistically significant trends of increasing brain cancer risk for the total amount of cell phone use and the years of use among people who began using cell phones before age 20. However, another large, case-control study in Sweden did not find an increased risk of brain cancer among people between the ages of 20 and 69. In addition, the international CEFALO study, which compared children who were diagnosed with brain cancer between ages 7 and 19 with similar children who were not, found no relationship between their cell phone use and risk for brain cancer.
Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K. Pooled analysis of case-control studies on malignant brain tumours and the use of mobile and cordless phones including living and deceased subjects.International Journal of Oncology 2011; 38(5):1465–1474. [PubMed Abstract]
Lönn S, Ahlbom A, Hall P, Feychting M. Long-term mobile phone use and brain tumor risk.American Journal of Epidemiology 2005; 161(6):526–535. [PubMed Abstract]
Aydin D, Feychting M, Schüz J, et al. Mobile phone use and brain tumors in children and adolescents: a multicenter case-control study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2011; 103(16):1264–1276. [PubMed Abstract]


  • NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program, which tracks cancer incidence in the United States over time, found no increase in the incidence of brain or other central nervous system cancers between 1987 and 2007, despite the dramatic increase in cell phone use in this country during that time. Similarly, incidence data from Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden for the period 1974–2008 revealed no increase in age-adjusted incidence of brain tumors. A 2012 study by NCI researchers, which compared observed glioma incidence rates in SEER with projected rates based on risks observed in the Interphone study, found that the projected rates were consistent with observed U.S. rates. The researchers also compared the SEER rates with projected rates based on a Swedish study published in 2011. They determined that the projected rates were at least 40 percent higher than, and incompatible with, the actual U.S. rates.
Inskip PD, Hoover RN, Devesa SS. Brain cancer incidence trends in relation to cellular telephone use in the United States. Neuro-Oncology 2010; 12(11):1147–1151. [PubMed Abstract]
Little MP, Rajaraman P, Curtis RE, et al. Mobile phone use and glioma risk: comparison of epidemiological study results with incidence trends in the United States. British Medical Journal2012; 344:e1147.
Deltour I, Johansen C, Auvinen A, et al. Time trends in brain tumor incidence rates in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, 1974–2003. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2009; 101(24):1721–1724. [PubMed Abstract]
Deltour I, Auvinen A, Feychting M, et al. Mobile phone use and incidence of glioma in the Nordic countries 1979–2008: consistency check. Epidemiology 2012; 23(2):301–307.
Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K. Pooled analysis of case-control studies on malignant brain tumours and the use of mobile and cordless phones including living and deceased subjects.International Journal of Oncology 2011; 38(5):1465–1474. [PubMed Abstract]
International Agency for Research on Cancer (2008). INTERPHONE Study: latest results update—8 October 2008 Exit Disclaimer. Lyon, France. Retrieved June 18, 2012.


  • Studies of workers exposed to radiofrequency energy have shown no evidence of increased risk of brain tumors among U.S. Navy electronics technicians, aviation technicians, or fire control technicians, those working in an electromagnetic pulse test program, plasticware workers, cellular phone manufacturing workers, or Navy personnel with a high probability of exposure to radar.
Ahlbom A, Green A, Kheifets L, et al. Epidemiology of health effects of radiofrequency exposure.Environmental Health Perspectives 2004; 112(17):1741–1754. [PubMed Abstract]


  1. What is radiofrequency energy and how does it affect the body?

    1. Radiofrequency energy is a form of electromagnetic radiation. Electromagnetic radiation can be categorized into two types: ionizing (e.g., x-rays, radon, and cosmic rays) and non-ionizing (e.g., radiofrequency and extremely low-frequency or power frequency).
    2. Exposure to ionizing radiation, such as from radiation therapy, is known to increase the risk of cancer. However, although many studies have examined the potential health effects of non-ionizing radiation from radar, microwave ovens, and other sources, there is currently no consistent evidence that non-ionizing radiation increases cancer risk.
    3. The only known biological effect of radiofrequency energy is heating. The ability of microwave ovens to heat food is one example of this effect of radiofrequency energy. Radiofrequency exposure from cell phone use does cause heating; however, it is not sufficient to measurably increase body temperature.
    4. A recent study showed that when people used a cell phone for 50 minutes, brain tissues on the same side of the head as the phone’s antenna metabolized more glucose than did tissues on the opposite side of the brain. The researchers noted that the results are preliminary, and possible health outcomes from this increase in glucose metabolism are still unknown.


  1. How is radiofrequency energy exposure measured in epidemiologic studies?

Levels of radiofrequency exposure are indirectly estimated using information from interviews or questionnaires. These measures include the following:

    1. How “regularly” study participants use cell phones (the minimum number of calls per week or month)
    2. The age and the year when study participants first used a cell phone and the age and the year of last use (allows calculation of the duration of use and time since the start of use)
    3. The average number of cell phone calls per day, week, or month (frequency)
    4. The average length of a typical cell phone call
    5. The total hours of lifetime use, calculated from the length of typical call times, the frequency of use, and the duration of use


  1. What do expert organizations conclude?

    1. The International Agency for Research on Cancer Exit Disclaimer (IARC), a component of the World Health Organization, has recently classified radiofrequency fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence from human studies, limited evidence from studies of radiofrequency energy and cancer in rodents, and weak mechanistic evidence (from studies of genotoxicity, effects on immune system function, gene and protein expression, cell signaling, oxidative stress, and apoptosis, along with studies of the possible effects of radiofrequency energy on the blood-brain barrier).
    2. The American Cancer Society Exit Disclaimer (ACS) states that the IARC classification means that there could be some risk associated with cancer, but the evidence is not strong enough to be considered causal and needs to be investigated further. Individuals who are concerned about radiofrequency exposure can limit their exposure, including using an ear piece and limiting cell phone use, particularly among children.
    3. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) states that the weight of the current scientific evidence has not conclusively linked cell phone use with any adverse health problems, but more research is needed.
    4. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for regulating the safety of machines and devices that emit radiation (including cell phones), notes that studies reporting biological changes associated with radiofrequency energy have failed to be replicated and that the majority of human epidemiologic studies have failed to show a relationship between exposure to radiofrequency energy from cell phones and health problems. (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2014)
    5. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that, although some studies have raised concerns about the possible risks of cell phone use, scientific research as a whole does not support a statistically significant association between cell phone use and health effects. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014)
    6. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) concludes that there is no scientific evidence that proves that wireless phone use can lead to cancer or to other health problems, including headaches, dizziness, or memory loss. (Federal Communications Commission, Unknown)


  1. Do children have a higher risk of developing cancer due to cell phone use than adults?

    1. In theory, children have the potential to be at greater risk than adults for developing brain cancer from cell phones. Their nervous systems are still developing and therefore more vulnerable to factors that may cause cancer. Their heads are smaller than those of adults and therefore have a greater proportional exposure to the field of radiofrequency radiation that is emitted by cell phones. And children have the potential of accumulating more years of cell phone exposure than adults do.
    2. So far, the data from studies in children with cancer do not support this theory. The first published analysis came from a large case-control study called CEFALO, which was conducted in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Switzerland. The study included children who were diagnosed with brain tumors between 2004 and 2008, when their ages ranged from 7 to 19. Researchers did not find an association between cell phone use and brain tumor risk in this group of children. However, they noted that their results did not rule out the possibility of a slight increase in brain cancer risk among children who use cell phones, and that data gathered through prospective studies and objective measurements, rather than participant surveys and recollections, will be key in clarifying whether there is an increased risk.
    3. Researchers from the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Spain are conducting another international study—Mobi-Kids —to evaluate the risk associated with new communications technologies (including cell phones) and other environmental factors in young people newly diagnosed with brain tumors at ages 10 to 24 years.
  2. What can cell phone users do to reduce their exposure to radiofrequency energy?

    1. The FDA and FCC have suggested some steps that concerned cell phone users can take to reduce their exposure to radiofrequency energy:
      1. Reserve the use of cell phones for shorter conversations or for times when a landline phone is not available.
      2. Use a hands-free device, which places more distance between the phone and the head of the user.
    2. Hands-free kits reduce the amount of radiofrequency energy exposure to the head because the antenna, which is the source of energy, is not placed against the head.


  1. What are other sources of radiofrequency energy?

    1. The most common exposures to radiofrequency energy are from telecommunications devices and equipment. In the United States, cell phones currently operate in a frequency range of about 1,800 to 2,200 megahertz (MHz). In this range, the electromagnetic radiation produced is in the form of non-ionizing radiofrequency energy.
    2. Cordless phones (phones that have a base unit connected to the telephone wiring in a house) often operate at radio frequencies similar to those of cell phones; however, since cordless phones have a limited range and require a nearby base, their signals are generally much less powerful than those of cell phones.
    3. Among other radiofrequency energy sources, AM/FM radios and VHF/UHF televisions operate at lower radio frequencies than cell phones, whereas sources such as radar, satellite stations,magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) devices, industrial equipment, and microwave ovens operate at somewhat higher radio frequencies.


7. Why are cellphones dangerous?
  1. A cellular phone is basically a radio that sends signals on waves to a base station. The carrier signal generates two types of radiation fields: a near-field plume and a far-field plume. Living organisms, too, generate electromagnetic fields at the cellular, tissue, organ, and organism level; this is called the biofield. Both the near-field and far-field plumes from cell phones and in the environment can wreak havoc with the human biofield, and when the biofield is compromised in any way, says Dr. Carlo, so is metabolism and physiology.
  2. b.“The near field plume is the one we’re most concerned with. This plume that’s generated within five or six inches of the center of a cell phone’s antenna is determined by the amount of power necessary to carry the signal to the base station,” he explains. “The more power there is, the farther the plume radiates the dangerous information-carrying radio waves.”
  3. A carrier wave oscillates at 1900 megahertz (MHz) in most phones, which is mostly invisible to our biological tissue and doesn’t do damage. The information-carrying secondary wave necessary to interpret voice or data is the problem, says Dr. Carlo. That wave cycles in a hertz (Hz) range familiar to the body. Your heart, for example, beats at two cycles per second, or two Hz. Our bodies recognize the information-carrying wave as an “invader,” setting in place protective biochemical reactions that alter physiology and cause biological problems that include intracellular free-radical buildup, leakage in the blood-brain barrier, genetic damage, disruption of intercellular communication, and an increase in the risk of tumors. The health dangers of recognizing the signal, therefore, aren’t from direct damage, but rather are due to the biochemical responses in the cell.
  4. Here’s what happens:
  5. Cellular energy is now used for protection rather than metabolism. Cell membranes harden, keeping nutrients out and waste products in.
  6. Waste accumulating inside the cells creates a higher concentration of free radicals, leading to both disruption of DNA repair (micronuclei) and cellular dysfunction.
  7. Unwanted cell death occurs, releasing the micronuclei from the disrupted DNA repair into the fluid between cells (interstitial fluid), where they are free to replicate and proliferate. This, says Dr. Carlo, is the most likely mechanism that contributes to cancer.
  8. Damage occurs to proteins on the cell membrane, resulting in disruption of intercellular communication. When cells can’t communicate with each other, the result is impaired tissue, organ, and organism function. In the blood-brain barrier, for example, cells can’t keep dangerous chemicals from reaching the brain tissue, which results in damage.

8. What studies are under way that will help further our understanding of the health effects of cell phone use?

    1. A large prospective cohort study of cell phone use and its possible long-term health effects was launched in Europe in March 2010. This study, known as COSMOS, has enrolled approximately 290,000 cell phone users aged 18 years or older to date and will follow them for 20 to 30 years.
    2. Participants in COSMOS will complete a questionnaire about their health, lifestyle, and current and past cell phone use. This information will be supplemented with information from health records and cell phone records.
    3. The challenge of this ambitious study is to continue following the participants for a range of health effects over many decades. Researchers will need to determine whether participants who leave are somehow different from those who remain throughout the follow-up period.
    4. Another study already under way is a case-control study called Mobi-Kids , which will include 2000 young people (aged 10-24 years) with newly diagnosed brain tumors and 4000 healthy young people. The goal of the study is to learn more about risk factors for childhood brain tumors. Results are expected in 2016.
    5. Although recall bias is minimized in studies that link participants to their cell phone records, such studies face other problems. For example, it is impossible to know who is using the listed cell phone or whether that individual also places calls using other cell phones. To a lesser extent, it is not clear whether multiple users of a single phone will be represented on a single phone company account.
  1. The NIEHS, which is part of the National Institutes of Health, is carrying out a study of risks related to exposure to radiofrequency energy (the type used in cell phones) in highly specialized labs that can specify and control sources of radiation and measure their effects on rodents.
9. What is the connection between voltage and electromagnetic fields?
  1. Electric fields are created by differences in voltage: the higher the voltage, the stronger will be the resultant field. Magnetic fields are created when electric current flows: the greater the current, the stronger the magnetic field. An electric field will exist even when there is no current flowing. If current does flow, the strength of the magnetic field will vary with power consumption but the electric field strength will be constant.


The independent variable is:
  1. The brand of cellphones (Iphone, Samsung, Sony, Nokia, XiaoMi)


The dependent variable is:
  1. The amount of voltage given out by phones before a phone call, when the phone call is picked up and after picking up the phone call


The constant variables are:
  1. The location of the caller
  2. The amount of time the phone is not being used.
  3. The amount of time the phone is receiving a call.


B.    Hypothesis
The more advanced a cellphone is, it will give out a higher amount of voltage than a less advanced model and the higher the voltage, the stronger the resultant electromagnetic force.


C.    Description in detail of method or procedures (The following are important and key items that should be included when formulating ANY AND ALL research plans.)


Equipment list:
  • Different Cell Phone Brands
    • 2 Samsung (Touch Screen)
    • 1 Nokia (Non Touch Screen)
    • 1 Sony (Touch Screen)
    • 2 iPhone (Touch Screen)
    • 1 XiaoMi (Touch Screen)
  • 1 Data Logger - With Voltage Sensor   
  • 30cm of Thick Copper Wire
  • 1 Roll of Scotch Tape
  • 1 Phone to call setup phone from a different location
  • 1 Pair of Scissors
  • 1 Diode


  • Procedures: Detail all procedures and experimental design to be used for data collection
Screen Shot 2015-02-17 at 7.11.08 pm.png


  1. Set up the experiment as shown in the diagram above.


  1. Place the phone on the copper wire.
  2. Turn on the data logger and start graphing mode for 5 minutes.
  3. Take down Voltage Range.
  4. Once finished, set graphing mode for 5 minutes and carry out steps below.
  5. At 50 seconds, make a phone call to the phone.
  6. At 100 seconds, answer the call.
  7. Take down Voltage Range again.
  8. Remove phone from setup.


Perform Steps 2-9 for all 7 Phones.

• Risk and Safety: Identify any potential risks and safety precautions to be taken.


1.    As this experiment involves cell phones, it might overheat and catch fire. Causing us to get burnt. To prevent this, we should have breaks between the calls to prevent overheating.
2.    Some of us might drop the phones causing it to crack and shatter and therefore we might get hurt by those fragments of glass. To prevent this, we should handle the phone with caution.
3. We might get headaches or get dizzy from overuse of electronics. To prevent this, we should take breaks from the electronics every 30 minutes for 5 min.


Data Analysis: Describe the procedures you will use to analyze the data/results that answer research questions or hypotheses


  1. Take recorded data from voltage sensor graphing mode.
  2. Put the data into tables below.


Xiao Mi

Voltage Range Without Call
Voltage Range With Call
Try 1


Try 2


Try 3


AVERAGE




Samsung GALAXY S5

Voltage Range Without Call
Voltage Range With Call
Try 1


Try 2


Try 3


AVERAGE




Sony Xperia V

Voltage Range Without Call
Voltage Range With Call
Try 1


Try 2


Try 3


AVERAGE




Nokia

Voltage Range Without Call
Voltage Range With Call
Try 1


Try 2


Try 3


AVERAGE





iPhone 3GS

Voltage Range Without Call
Voltage Range With Call
Try 1


Try 2


Try 3


AVERAGE




Samsung GALAXY Pocket Neo

Voltage Range Without Call
Voltage Range With Call
Try 1


Try 2


Try 3


AVERAGE




iPhone 6 Plus

Voltage Range Without Call
Voltage Range With Call
Try 1


Try 2


Try 3


AVERAGE




D. Bibliography: List at least five (5) major references (e.g. science journal articles, books, internet sites) from your literature review. If you plan to use vertebrate animals, one of these references must be an animal care reference. Choose the APA format and use it consistently to reference the literature used in the research plan. List your entries in alphabetical order.


Andersen J, Kuhn S, Krigslund R, Sørensen T. 2011. Overview of new technologies. International Scientific Conference on EMF and Health. November 16-17, 2011, Brussels, Germany. http://ec.europa.eu/health/electromagnetic_fields/docs/ev_20111116_co12_en.pdf


Cellphone radiation depends on wireless carrier. (2013, November 12). Retrieved from http://www.ewg.org/research/cell-phone-radiation-depends-wireless-carrier


De Brabandere, S., & Maranowski, M. (2014, October 24). Does your cell phone radiate? measuring cell phone electromagnetic radiation. Retrieved January 13, 2015 from http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_ideas/Elec_p068.shtml


Dr., Mercola. (2012, June 16).New urgent warning to all cell phone users. Retrieved from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/06/16/emf-safety-tips.aspx


Dunning, B. (2008, September 02). How dangerous is cell phone radiation?. Retrieved from http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4117


Electromagnetic radiation ( emr ) and potential adverse health affects. (2007, October 19). Retrieved from http://www.ecolibria.com.au/Resources/electromagnetic-radiation-emr-and-potential-adverse-health-affects


(2008, June 11). How Much Radiation Does Your Phone Emit? Retrieved January 16, 2015, from http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/11/how-much-radiation-does-your-phone-emit/?_r=1


HowStuffWorks.com. (2001, August 08). How cell phone radiation works. Retrieved from http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cell-phone-radiation2.htm


Koetsier, J. (2013, February 6). 800 million android smartphones, 300 million iphones in active use by december 2013, study says. Retrieved from http://venturebeat.com/2013/02/06/800-million-android-smartphones-300-million-iphones-in-active-use-by-december-2013-study-says/


Kovach, S. (2007, August). The hidden dangers of cell phone radiation. Retrieved from http://www.lef.org/magazine/2007/8/report_cellphone_radiation/Page-01


LessEMF.com (Unknown). Radiofrequency meters. Retrieved from http://www.lessemf.com/rf.html


MicroWorlds. (Unknown). Electromagnetic radiation. Retrieved from http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cell-phone-radiation2.htm


NASA Official: Ruth Netting. (2007, March 27). The electromagnet spectrum. Retrieved from http://science.hq.nasa.gov/kids/imagers/ems/waves3.html


National Cancer Institute. (June, 2013 24). Cell phones and cancer risk. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/cellphones


National Institute on Drug Abuse, 6001 Executive Blvd, Room 5274, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. (2011, February 23). Effects of cell phone radiofrequency signal exposure on brain glucose metabolism.. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21343580


Patty Hemingway. (December, 2006). The risks to health from electromagnetic radiation (emr). Retrieved from http://www.positivehealth.com/article/environmental/the-risks-to-health-from-electromagnetic-radiation-emr


Space Environment. (Unknown). What is electromagnetic radiation?. Retrieved from http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/space-environment/2-what-is-electromagnetic-radiation.html  


U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2014, January 10).Reducing exposure: Hands-free kits and other accessories. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/HomeBusinessandEntertainment/CellPhones/ucm116293.htm


Wyde, M. (Unknown). Cell phones. Retrieved January 16, 2015, from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/cellphones/


No comments:

Post a Comment