Mohon tunggu...
farmita chairani
farmita chairani Mohon Tunggu... -

saya asli berasal dari NTB. tapi saya SMA di SEMESTA Semarang. kemudian saya sekarang melanjutkan pendidikan saya di bangku kuliah di Universitas Diponegoro Semarang di Program Studi Ilmu Keperawatan Fakultas Kedokteran.

Selanjutnya

Tutup

Sosbud

"Laptop and Mobile Phone Radiation"

21 Oktober 2010   15:28 Diperbarui: 26 Juni 2015   12:13 394
+
Laporkan Konten
Laporkan Akun
Kompasiana adalah platform blog. Konten ini menjadi tanggung jawab bloger dan tidak mewakili pandangan redaksi Kompas.
Lihat foto
Pemerintahan. Sumber ilustrasi: FREEPIK/Freepik

Radio base licensing procedures have been established in the majority of urban spaces regulated either at municipal/county, provincial/state or national level. Mobile telephone service providers are, in many regions, required to obtain construction licenses, provide certification of antenna emission levels and assure compliance to ICNIRP standards and/or to other environmental legislation.

Many governmental bodies also require that competing telecommunication companies try to achieve sharing of towers so as to decrease environmental and cosmetic impact. This issue is an influential factor of rejection of installation of new antennas and towers in communities.

The safety standards in the U.S. are set by theFederal Communications Commission(FCC). The FCC has based its standards primarily on those standards established by theInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE), specifically Subcommittee 4 of the "International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety".Switzerland has set safety limits lower than the ICNIRP limits for certain "sensitive areas" (classrooms, for example).

In the Courts

In theUSA, a small number ofpersonal injurylawsuitshave been filed by individuals against cellphone manufacturers, such asMotorola,[73]NEC,SiemensandNokia, on the basis of allegations of causation ofbrain cancerand death. In US federal court, expert testimony relating to science must be first evaluated by a judge, in aDaubert hearing, to be relevant and valid before it is admissible as evidence. In one case against Motorola, the plaintiffs alleged that the use of wireless handheld telephones could cause brain cancer, and that the use of Motorola phones caused one plaintiff’s cancer. The judge ruled that no sufficiently reliable and relevant scientific evidence in support of either general or specific causation was proffered by the plaintiffs; accepted a motion to exclude the testimony of the plaintiffs’ experts; and denied a motion to exclude the testimony of the defendants' experts.

French High Court ruling against telecom company


In February 2009 the telecom companyBouygues Telecomwas ordered to take down amobile phone mastdue to uncertainty about its effect on health. Residents in the communeCharbonnièresin theRhônedepartment had sued the company claiming adverse health effects from the radiation emitted by the 19 meter tall antenna.The milestone ruling by theVersailles Court of Appealreversed theburden of proofwhich is usual in such cases by emphasizing the extreme divergence between different countries in assessing safe limits for such radiation. The court stated that, "Considering that, while the reality of the risk remains hypothetical, it becomes clear from reading the contributions and scientific publications produced in debate and the divergent legislative positions taken in various countries, that uncertainty over the harmlessness of exposure to the waves emitted by relay antennas persists and can be considered serious and reasonable".

Precautionary principle


In 2000, theWorld Health Organization(WHO) recommended that theprecautionary principlecould be voluntarily adopted in this case.[77]It follows the recommendations of theEuropean Communityfor environmental risks. According to the WHO, the "precautionary principle" is "a risk management policy applied in circumstances with a high degree of scientific uncertainty, reflecting the need to take action for a potentially serious risk without awaiting the results of scientific research." Other less stringent recommended approaches areprudent avoidance principleandas low as reasonably practicable. Although all of these are problematic in application, due to the widespread use and economic importance of wireless telecommunication systems in modern civilization, there is an increased popularity of such measures in the general public, though also evidence that such approaches may increase concern. They involve recommendations such as the minimization of cellphone usage, the limitation of use by at-risk population (such as children), the adoption of cellphones and microcells with as low as reasonably practicable levels of radiation, the wider use of hands-free andearphonetechnologies such asBluetoothheadsets, the adoption of maximal standards of exposure, RF field intensity and distance of base stations antennas from human habitations, and so forth.

Precautionary Measures and health advisories

Some national radiation advisory authorities, including those of Austria,France, Germany,and Sweden,have recommended measures to minimize exposure to their citizens. Examples of the recommendations are:

§Use hands-free to decrease the radiation to the head.

§Keep the mobile phone away from the body.

§Do not use telephone in a car without an external antenna.

The use of "hands-free" was not recommended by the British Consumers' Association in a statement in November 2000 as they believed that exposure was increased.However, measurements for the (then) UK Department of Trade and Industryand others for the French l’Agence française de sécurité sanitaire environnementaleshowed substantial reductions. In 2005 Professor Lawrie Challis and others said clipping aferrite beadonto hands-free kits stops the radio waves travelling up the wire and into the head. Several nations have advised moderate use of mobile phones for children.

Infra merah yang dipancarkan oleh peralatan elektronik (mouse, remote TV, handphone tertentu) yang telah memenuhi standar kesehatan (FCC) adalah tidak berbahaya. Banyak sumber infra merah lain dalam intensitas yang besar, misalnya matahari, lilin yang menyala, tidak berbahaya bagi tubuh, malah menyehatkan.

Bahkan sekarang ada sauna dengan infra-merah, sehingga Anda tidak perlu repot-repot dengan uap-air panas. Terlepas dari masalah kontroversi penggunaan sauna ini, sauna dengan infra merah tidak menyebabkan sesak nafas karena menghirup uap air.

Oleh karena itu, sudah seharusnya kita dapat mengawasi dimulai diri kita sendiri dengan penggunaan alat-alat yang dapat membahayakan tubuh kita tersebut. Lakuanlah yang terbaik untuk tubuh kita sejak dini, dan jangan melakukan hal-hal yang dapat membahayakan kesehatan kita kini dan kelak.

source : wikipedia , Oka mahendra

written by : Farmita chairani PSIK FK UNDIP

Baca konten-konten menarik Kompasiana langsung dari smartphone kamu. Follow channel WhatsApp Kompasiana sekarang di sini: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaYjYaL4Spk7WflFYJ2H

HALAMAN :
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
Mohon tunggu...

Lihat Konten Sosbud Selengkapnya
Lihat Sosbud Selengkapnya
Beri Komentar
Berkomentarlah secara bijaksana dan bertanggung jawab. Komentar sepenuhnya menjadi tanggung jawab komentator seperti diatur dalam UU ITE

Belum ada komentar. Jadilah yang pertama untuk memberikan komentar!
LAPORKAN KONTEN
Alasan
Laporkan Konten
Laporkan Akun