500-06-001018-197
PAGE : 21
51
In a report filed by Plaintiffs, the scientist Om Ghandi explains that
“The ICNIRP
guideline [used by the French] is more lax and prescribes that the microwave radiation
for such wireless devices not create an SAR in any part of the body of more than 2.0 W/kg
for any 10 g of tissue”. Ohm further relates that “the ICNIRP standard will permit radiated
powers of cell phones to be 2.5 to 3 times higher than those allowed by the IEEE/FCC
standard”. Under this reserve, all the Apple and Samsung phones listed are considered
to be “conforme”, as appears from the column conformite_aux_normes, which allowed for
the phones at separation distance anywhere from 0 to 25 mm. Hence, the French testing
would be of no use and could not be seen as “some evidence” filed to meet the burden
of demonstration that the phones do not meet the SAR level.
[72]
That being said, the table is nevertheless of relevance and interest. It evidences
that from September 2012 to 2017, aside from testing at their chosen separation distance,
manufacturers also tested their phones at 5 mm separation distance (das_tronc_a_5mm)
and at 0 mm separation distance (das_tronc_au_contact) and these test results are also
set out on the table. In particular, when one examines Samsung data, one notices a very
clear pattern: the SAR values increases several fold as separation distances diminish
from 15 mm, to 5mm to 0 mm separation.52 The same pattern is exhibited for Apple, from
a 5 mm separation to a 0 mm separation.53
6.
Other deleterious effects other than thermal effects
[73] In its introductory paragraphs, Plaintiffs state their case regarding biological effects
which go beyond mere thermal tissue heating as follows:
Numerous recent scientific publications, supported by hundreds of scientists
worldwide, have shown that RF radiation exposure affects living organisms at
levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include
increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic
damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning
and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-
being in humans. Thus, Defendants’ design, manufacture, and sale of
smartphones that far exceed applicable guidelines exacerbate the health risks to
Plaintiffs and the Classes.
[74] These non-thermal adverse effects of RF exposure have attracted and continue to
attract a great deal of scientific attention and much research work is carried out
continuously to properly assess them.
51
Exhibit P-29, p.
52
Exhibit P-3C : lines 81, 89, 99, 105 to 107, 112, 151, 157, 169, 172, 178 to 181, 193, 194, 202, 203,
240, 53, 255, 267-270, 276, 303, 347-348, 374 and 376.
Exhibit P-3C : lines 223, 233, 234 and 339.
53