Digital vs Analog cordless Phone? Health Radiation is the same?

I noticed that you can buy a 5.8Mhz phone in both analog or digital. I realize most people thing cordless phones are fairly safe, but is an still curious if one gives off more radiation then the other before I buy a my next phone. thanks

Reply to
lbbss
Loading thread data ...
5.8 GHz (not MHz) phones don't seem to have very good range. You might look at the DECT 6.0 phones which work a bit above 2 GHz.

Unless you expect to be on the phone for many hours each day, I don't see why you should be much worried about the amoung of RF your brain is receiving.

Excuse me, but the open sore above my right ear has started bleeding again, and I have to attend to it.

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

more power equals more radiation? is that correct?

I read some info on the web suggesting that the new Dect technology is worst for you, because of the lower frequencies (1.9Ghz) affects your cells in a negative way.

Reply to
lbbss

If it were heating, you would feel it heating your flesh surely?

--
http://www.petersparrots.com    http://www.insanevideoclips.com   
http://www.petersphotos.com
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Peter Hucker

How is it supposed to work if it doesn't radiate some RF?

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Grin, Maybe semaphore. :^)

George H.

Reply to
George Herold

Infrared?

--
Husk kørelys bagpå, hvis din bilfabrikant har taget den idiotiske  
beslutning at undlade det.
Reply to
Leif Neland

Get one with a speakerphone in the handset. Stand as far away as possible while you talk.

Reply to
mike

Even a fullphore wouldn't help him. ;-)

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Duh. How will you have infrared without radiation?

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Run a couple wires for the speaker, to reduce feedback. ;-)

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Better than 2.4GHz Bluetooth radiation though, IMO.

--
Daniel Mandic
Reply to
Daniel Mandic

I think he is talking about base which radiates continuously. Just keep base at distance, it will be no problem. The handset is right in your face, but even it is only 10 mw low power. A cell phone could be at least 30 times this power.

Greg

Reply to
gregz

Really? Do you have any idea how much IR radiation you would need to be able to use a cordless phone around a corner, or on the other side of a wall?

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Don't you think that if cell phones posed any real danger we would have overflowing cemetaries today? How about the engineers who spent their entire adult lives working in high power RF fields which would light flourescent lamps with no connections, yet they were still healthy in their 80s. I met them at a VOA facility, and the old 500 KW WLW transmitter site.

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Of course, IR is more directional. I meant 'better' concerning the health question. Cordless phone with IR makes no sense to me..., maybe in an open room/appartment without interior-walls, corners etc., with a

360° IR transmitting unit installed on the ceiling, if there is such thing.
--
Daniel Mandic
Reply to
Daniel Mandic

My 5.8 GHz panasonic cordless phone works 100 feet from the base, all over the inside of my house, the outbuildings and the entire lot. How would you use IR when it's 100°F or hotter outside?

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

I have never heard about that. Is there a temperature dependence going with IR?

--
Daniel Mandic
Reply to
Daniel Mandic

IR is heat. High temperatures mask IR signaling.

Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

In my checkered past, I designed and built an IR paging system that never made it to market. That's different from a cordless phone in that the IR paging path is one way. To cover a rather large office area, I was running 10 watts of IR into a hemispherical reflector to get wide area coverage. It also has the problem of only allowing one conversation (or compressed audio time slice) at a time per room. No problem for paging, but big problems for IR. Visualize a room full of TV sets, as found in the department stores, and expecting all the remote controls to run simultaneously at the same time. I could have used different "colors" of IR to get more than one channel, but the filters are pricy. The spec was for 100 channels with 205 utilization, which means 20 different "colors". That won't happen.

To go bidirectional, I would need at least several hundred milliwatts of IR in the handset, or less with shorter range. Also add extra voice compression and switching circuitry, so that it simulates a full duplex system. Compared to the typical 5mw of RF produced by various wireless cordless phone systems, IR would be a battery hog.

Dealing with obstructions wasn't much of a problem. IR bounces nicely off of various objects. Multiple emitters were also a big help. However, dealing with IR interference from lighting and sunlight through windows was not much fun. The light from these would overload the receive phototransistor resulting in a very high baseline noise level, which the emitter had to overcome. That's another reason why I needed 10 watts.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.