Re: SAR values

Re: SAR values

Inbox

x

suresh karve	16 Jan (11 days ago)
to Girish, me

Sir,

So basically you agree that how the U.S.regulator-FCC-arrived at the figure of 1.6 SAR value needs to be further investigated and should not be followed by India?

Suresh

On Wednesday, 15 January 2014 9:10 PM, Prof. Girish Kumar <gkumar@ee.iitb.ac.in> wrote:

Dear Suresh,

Without time factor added, how can anybody say that there are no adverse
effects at all below the radiation level of 40w/kg. May be, they tested
it for very short time.

**********************************************************************
      Girish Kumar
      Professor, Electrical Engineering Department
      I.I.T. Bombay, Powai, Mumbai - 400076, INDIA
      Tel. - (022) 2576 7436, Fax  - (022) 2572 3707
      email- gkumar@ee.iitb.ac.in, prof.gkumar@gmail.com
      Blog - http://profgirishkumar.blogspot.in/
**********************************************************************

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014, suresh karve wrote:

> Sir,
> Thanks for your explanation and the point about time of usage is taken.But it does not reply to my 1st querry that the FCC guideline based on the assumption that there were
> no adverse effects at all below the radiation level of 40w/kg is correct or not ; because the word used is assumption.
> Therefore it suggests that it could be an empirical value!So if tomorrow, there is some other assumption, the whole calculation of SAR valuesand guidelines goes out of the
> window!
> Thanking you and awaiting your reply,
> Suresh Karve
>
>