Apple Tech Support Staff Urged to Stay Mum on iPhone 12 Radiation Issue | Hacker News Reader

Apple Tech Support Staff Urged to Stay Mum on iPhone 12 Radiation Issue

bloomberg.com

40 pointsoatmeal136 comments

What company hasn't reminded their employees not to comment on ongoing litigation in public? This entire story seems so forced, with outlets seemingly pretending that they don't know their headlines are implying ionizing radiation.

Yep. Regardless of whether it is positive or negative, you don't want your general employees commenting on the safety of the companies products. On such sensitive topics, you want to leave the floor open to SMEs and recognized industry experts.

The problem is that opens the door for the company to sweep issues under the rug. This is a pattern history has repeated time and time again

How does that change the decision of not letting the company's accountant comment on safety?

What do you think? Give it a couple of your best effort theories.

Why would I give a theory when I don't even agree with your position. That is a bizarre request. I don't quite understand what point you're making except calling it a problem.

I find that answering a question with a question often results in better understanding and insightfulness by the pupil than just spoon-feeding it to them. Every good parent and professor will be familiar with this technique.

Thanks, but I want my beliefs to be based on more truths and fewer falsehoods as much I can, so your input doesn't really help me with my goals.

You could at least try.

Look, this time its bullshit. But let's say the company in this case is something like DuPont. Let's say the recognized industry experts are paid to shut up and write whitepapers backing up the company. This has happened plenty of times over the course of history and employees talking about unethical or even downright dangerous behavior should at least be heard I think... even if they don't understand what non-ionizing radiation is.

It's also a shamefully clickbait title.

When the general public sees "radiation" they think ionizing radiation, and Bloomberg damn well knows it.

clickbait titles are kind of bloomberg's schtick, i'd observe.

The public know the difference? I bet many people on HN don't, let alone the general consumers. Would you rather them ignore it than doing further research?

There is such as a weird bias for Apple on HN, unlike any other tech companies.

Many people on HN are in a good position to understand just how good Apple products are, so they invest in them (both by buying products and building workflows on them, and by investing in shares).

Once invested, bullshit accusations against the company harm you individually, because the company has to spend time and money proving that some dude in France set up a meter wrong. Those engineering resources could have gone into making the product better.

The title would be less misleading if they simply changed s/radiation/electromagnetic radiation/.

They don't just do this with Apple. News outlets have been sensationalizing dubious research into the link between mobile phone RF exposure and a variety of maladies for decades now.

How is it forced? The article is very short and informative. There isn't a single personal opinion in there.

Because it doesn't give any perspective on any of the actions that Apple is taking. Facts alone don't make an informative article. This one's less egregious than many, but it suffers the same pervasive issue as most other articles do: It doesn't look at the big picture or the why behind anything and just reports in a technically factual, but widely misleading fashion

Electromagnetic radiation and ionising radiation are two very different things. Phones emit electromagnetic radiation. EMR is by far the less harmful of the two health wise - a phone will at worst heat tissue to imperceptible levels. Is this a serious issue for owners to even worry about?

Prediction: French lab made some kind of mistake, which will be quietly announced in a month with almost no fanfare.

France's claim:

> First there is a "membre" - or limb - check, for when a phone is in close contact with a person's body, such as when it is held or placed in a trouser pocket.

> The SAR limit for this is four watts per kilogram.

4 W/kg

> The regulator said the device's "membre" SAR was 5.74 watts per kilogram - higher than the limit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-66795168

Thoughts on this threshold?

Looks like you get way more of a SAR rating in your head from a typical MRI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate#MRI_s...

Of course it should be mentioned that you're not usually in an MRI machine multiple times a day.

You also get much more radiation by visiting chernobyl than by storing a bit of radioactive material under your pillow but it's not advisable to do so.

Unless you're digging trenches in the soil or paying the elephant foot a visit, the radioactive material under your pillow is actually almost definitely worse for you (depending on exactly how radioactive we're talking)!

Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate

https://archive.is/FcEOC

I have an iPhone 12 and have had cancer that's typically caused by radiation. Should I be worried?

Note that HN comments are not a useful source for legal or medical advice; please consult with a professional regarding the legal and medical concerns expressed.

(I am not your lawyer, this is not legal advice, I don't work for Apple in any capacity.)

Honey, never underestimate the impact of your well intentioned advice.

I am always amused and annoyed when ChatGPT gives me amazing medical, psychological and legal advice (that I simply can't afford myself, just a factory worker), and ends it with 'but contact a real doctor/shrink for real advice'. Advice which is just an echo of wise words spoken by people like you, for which I'm always grateful.

Someone has to refer them to a professional, and certainly it’s unlikely anyone else will. I looked and there’s already a nice selection of replies as predicted, so I’m still comfortable with my contribution here.

> Honey,

Is this an autocorrect typo for something relevant in this context? I wasn’t sure how to interpret it, so apologies if I’ve disregarded something important in my reply.

I don't have an answer for you, but it will be a hard one in general to get answered as cell phone radiation dangers is one of those highly controversial subjects that have been riddled with pseudoscience and quacks. Best of luck though, sincerely.

Radio (Electromagnetic radiation) is what’s used to communicate over Wi-Fi and your FM radio.

High frequency light such as UV radiation is what causes cancer.

The concern by the French is over the radio.

french elite tries to educate big US company after failed colonizarion. (I am french)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com