The EETimes community has a great opportunity to demonstrate leadership on this topic. Please keep us posted on progress towards resolution. Is the FCC going to pursue documented violations or are the watchdog measurements faulty? I'm sure that the collected fines would be appreciated by a hard pressed Washington DC (and encourage the telecommunications industry to improve their self-policing practices).
... lets start with a ban on MBA degree handed to anybody who does not have any other ...
The start requring technical pedigree from anybody applying to work in technical agencies ...
All that is common sense but I am afraid we lost it some time ago ...
What we have as the reason that all of the violations are allowed is a new FCC that is composed of non-technical people who are only interested in the money. It is very clear that technical reality is something that they simply do not understand. But a law degree and an MBA simply don't qualify anybody for any sort of honest employment,mwhich is why they work foir the government. So being the technically illiterate people that they are, and being paid off by some commercial folks with lots of money to pay them off with, they naturally go for the money. What else would one expect them to do? No, it is neither legal nor moral, but then that is not what is taught in law school these days.
perhaps some blame is because of the darn fragmented wireless technology in the US. Every cell tower has multiple rings of antennas: CDMA, GSM, ATT, Sprint, Tmobile, Verizon---everyone has a separate transceiver so no wonder the E-M field in front of that christmas tree is huge.
Everywhere else in the world they settled on one system per area (bands differ so no universal harmony yet). I think the carriers over there just settle charges for using each other's base stations---it probably just evens itself out in proportion to how many base stations each one owns.
I've heard that LTE finally harmonizes the system worldwide---I am looking forward to that.
It depends on the construction of the roof structure and antenna placement. Unless you actually perform field strength measurements, you cannot be sure what exposure is inside the building. Inverse square law applies, but RF propogation is not always straight line, and reflects of metal objects in unexpected ways.
FCC, about 10 years ago, recognized the danger of such communications and set what they thought were adequately low power levels for transmitters.
I hope the author is wrong, but I suspect he is right: Lousy enforcement has caused widespread violation.
If the reader doubts the danger of electromagnetic exposure, it is analyzed and explained in "Biological Effects of Microwaves: Thermal and Nonthermal Mechanisms" at http://www.scribd.com/doc/45663757/Biological-Effects-of-Microwaves-Thermal-and-Nonthermal-Mechanisms,
an older version of which was posted at arXiv.
EM Radiation Policy Group
I lost interest after the word "family" in the second paragraph, "US workers and families are at risk of overexposure to RF at hazardous levels."
Another self-promoting FUD agenda. Nothing to see there, move along.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.